Why is everything in the Bible true and accurate?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Nudge for Romans1009.

Perhaps a little patience?

Why don’t give me the url of the atheist website you’re taking these contradictions from so I can peruse them at my leisure?

@ghost-of-a-duke said
There is a contradiction in the following 2 passages. That is what we are talking about.

"We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him." 1 John 5:18


"For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."
Ecclesiastes 7:20

You realize, don’t you, that the first verse you quoted is from the New Testament when Christians have God’s Holy Spirit indwelling them and they have been made righteous in Jesus Christ, while the second verse you quoted is from the Old Testament *before Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and Resurrection* which ushered in the New Covenant?

You’re comparing the old covenant to the New Covenant and claiming they’re the same when they couldn’t be more different.

In the old covenant, man tried - and failed - to be righteous with God through law keeping.

In the New Covenant, man becomes righteous with God by accepting and believing in Jesus Christ and believing in His Resurrection.

rajk999 makes the same false comparison and false equivalence between the two covenants.

@pb1022 said
Where’s Jesus Christ’s body? Why could no one find it when the Apostles claimed to have seen Him alive after His crucifixion and death?

There’s plenty of evidence for the Resurrection. Use Google. I’m not wasting my time copy-and-pasting it when you’re not going to read it.

Google, for starters, “15 Logical Reasons to Believe the Resurrection.”

The Bible is not evidence that a resurrection occurred. It is a claim in need of evidence.

The historian Tacitus in his work Annals, claims that there was a battle in the Teutoburg Forest in the year 9 in which three Roman legions were annihilated by a coalition of Germanic tribes. It was a turning point in European history, as it marked the farthest advance of the Roman Empire into what is now Germany. Tacitus' work, however, is not evidence that such a battle took place. It is a claim in need of evidence.

Evidence looks like this: archeologists locate a site which fairly closely matches what Tacitus describes, taking into account 2,000 years of erosion and geological changes (rivers may shift their beds), and artifacts are recovered from the site which are reliably dated to the time in question and which are consistent with Roman kit (swords, bridles, bits of armor, etc.) known from and corroborated by other archeological finds, and these artifacts are damaged in a manner consistent with a battle.

The fact that we have no body answering to that of the crucified Jesus is not evidence that he rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. No more so than the fact that we have no body for Odin is evidence that he is now in Valhalla.

@moonbus said
The Bible is not evidence that a resurrection occurred. It is a claim in need of evidence.

The historian Tacitus in his work Annals, claims that there was a battle in the Teutoburg Forest in the year 9 in which three Roman legions were annihilated by a coalition of Germanic tribes. It was a turning point in European history, as it marked the farthest advance ...[text shortened]... aven. No more so than the fact that we have no body for Odin is evidence that he is now in Valhalla.

I hear you, but the Pharisees (and quite a few others) were actively interested in finding Jesus Christ’s body (and knew where He had been entombed) in order to prove His disciples were lying when they said they had seen Him alive after His crucifixion and entombment.

And without His Resurrection, Christianity wouldn’t exist because His disciples were dispirited by His crucifixion and death, were afraid of the Pharisees and had gone back to their old professions.

They didn’t start preaching in the Name of Jesus Christ until after they saw the Resurrected Christ.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
There is a contradiction in the following 2 passages. That is what we are talking about.

"We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him." 1 John 5:18


"For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."
Ecclesiastes 7:20

Again, the life in Christ in us, which is us being born of God does not sin. We lay down our lives, turn from sin and follow the Spirit of God. That which is born of God doesn't sin, when we are walking in the flesh we cannot please God. There isn't any man who hasn't sinned except Jesus Christ, and it is His life, God in us that keeps us from sin it highlights to us the evil that is sin.

Romans 7 covers this well.

For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

@pb1022 said
You realize, don’t you, that the first verse you quoted is from the New Testament when Christians have God’s Holy Spirit indwelling them and they have been made righteous in Jesus Christ, while the second verse you quoted is from the Old Testament *before Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and Resurrection* which ushered in the New Covenant?

You’re comparing the old cove ...[text shortened]... rection.

rajk999 makes the same false comparison and false equivalence between the two covenants.

But Romans 3:23 also says "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

Again, how are such passages (from the OT and NT) not a contradiction of, ""We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him." 1 John 5:18

@ghost-of-a-duke said
But Romans 3:23 also says "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."

Again, how are such passages (from the OT and NT) not a contradiction of, ""We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him." 1 John 5:18

I withdraw the above question.

@pb1022 said
You realize, don’t you, that the first verse you quoted is from the New Testament when Christians have God’s Holy Spirit indwelling them and they have been made righteous in Jesus Christ, while the second verse you quoted is from the Old Testament *before Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and Resurrection* which ushered in the New Covenant?

You’re comparing the old cove ...[text shortened]... rection.

rajk999 makes the same false comparison and false equivalence between the two covenants.

The New Testament states at least once that the spirit of Christ was in the Old Testament prophets.

@divegeester said
The New Testament states at least once that the spirit of Christ was in the Old Testament prophets.

Not permanently.

And I believe in the Old Testament, the Spirit of God “came upon” or “was upon” a prophet and was not “in” the prophet as is the case with Christians in the New Testament.

Can you supply a few verses to demonstrate your position?

@pb1022 said
I hear you, but the Pharisees (and quite a few others) were actively interested in finding Jesus Christ’s body (and knew where He had been entombed) in order to prove His disciples were lying when they said they had seen Him alive after His crucifixion and entombment.

And without His Resurrection, Christianity wouldn’t exist because His disciples were dispirited by His cruc ...[text shortened]... They didn’t start preaching in the Name of Jesus Christ until after they saw the Resurrected Christ.

Jamal Khashoggi's body hasn't been found either. That's not evidence that he rose from the dead.

Orisis's body hasn't been found either. That's not evidence that when his wife re-assembled all the body parts, he was returned to life.

No body isn't evidence of a miracle. It's just no body, that's all.

@moonbus said
Jamal Khashoggi's body hasn't been found either. That's not evidence that he rose from the dead.

Orisis's body hasn't been found either. That's not evidence that when his wife re-assembled all the body parts, he was returned to life.

No body isn't evidence of a miracle. It's just no body, that's all.

Did people *see* Jamal Khashoggi alive after his death?

Did people *see* Orisis alive after his death?

It’s not solely the missing body when it comes to Jesus Christ. It’s people who said they saw Him alive *after* His crucifixion and entombment.

And it’s Jesus Christ Himself predicting His Resurrection *before* His crucifixion.

@moonbus said
Jamal Khashoggi's body hasn't been found either. That's not evidence that he rose from the dead.

Orisis's body hasn't been found either. That's not evidence that when his wife re-assembled all the body parts, he was returned to life.

No body isn't evidence of a miracle. It's just no body, that's all.

Osiris (just looked him up) is Greek mythology anyway.

@pb1022 said
Did people *see* Jamal Khashoggi alive after his death?

Did people *see* Orisis alive after his death?

It’s not solely the missing body when it comes to Jesus Christ. It’s people who said they saw Him alive *after* His crucifixion and entombment.

And it’s Jesus Christ Himself predicting His Resurrection *before* His crucifixion.

If someone tells you he was adducted by space aliens, transported to a space ship, subjected to a medical examination, and underwent a brain transplant -- all things quite beyond our technology -- would you believe that, just on someone's say-so? No, of course not.

If someone tells you someone was once was adducted by space aliens 2,000 years ago, transported to a space ship, subjected to a medical examination, and underwent a brain transplant -- all things quite beyond our technology -- would you believe that, just on someone's say-so? No, of course not.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Someone's say-so 2,000 ago years doesn't come anywhere near to that grade of evidence.

Someone's rising from the dead is even more extraordinary than alien abduction. You're going to have to do a lot better than the garbled statements of the NT, none of which was written within 50 years of Jesus's lifetime.

@moonbus said
If someone tells you he was adducted by space aliens, transported to a space ship, subjected to a medical examination, and underwent a brain transplant -- all things quite beyond our technology -- would you believe that, just on someone's say-so? No, of course not.

If someone tells you someone was once was adducted by space aliens 2,000 years ago, transported to a space s ...[text shortened]... han the garbled statements of the NT, none of which was written within 80 years of Jesus's lifetime.

Actually, you’re wrong about when the New Testament was written, and reports of people seeing Jesus Christ alive after His crucifixion and entombment is not the only evidence of His Resurrection.

If you’re genuinely interested in the evidence, Google “15 Logical Reasons to Believe the Resurrection” for some of it.

If not, that’s fine too.

But you should know three experts in evaluating evidence, two of whom were atheists, investigated the evidence for Jesus Christ’s Resurrection, became convinced the Resurrection happened and converted to Christianity.

I posted the article a few times before in here. Let me know if you didn’t see it and I’ll post it again.

@pb1022 said
Actually, you’re wrong about when the New Testament was written, and reports of people seeing Jesus Christ alive after His crucifixion and entombment is not the only evidence of His Resurrection.

If you’re genuinely interested in the evidence, Google “15 Logical Reasons to Believe the Resurrection” for some of it.

If not, that’s fine too.

But you should know three exp ...[text shortened]... ted the article a few times before in here. Let me know if you didn’t see it and I’ll post it again.

Yes, I have read the list. There is not a scrap of evidence there. Just claims in need of evidence.