Did god write the bible?

Nov 2008
58,000
4,147
Washington state
While I agree with you that factually one can reduce the whole story of god to a joke remark, for someone like you it’s not a good thing to do though, it’ll upset a lot of your fellow believers .
While I agree with you that factually one can reduce the whole story of god to a joke remark, for someone like you it’s not a good thing to do though, it’ll upset a lot of your fellow believers .
Sounds like a weak argument to me.
 
Apr 2014
35,624
22,346
Maryland
Did god write the bible?


Sure, on LSD maybe. If snakes and eating the forbidden fruit didn't fool you I don't know what will. Maybe the whole Jonah and the Whale story. Ya, right, it's real!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah. Suckers!

Oh ya, the Burning Bush and that walking on water thing. Too funny.

No wonder Christians and Evangelicals still support Trump. They're easily conned.
It’s alll true.....I turned around and looked at my husband and damn, now I’m a pillar of salt
 
Likes: HadEnough2
Dec 2014
11,096
8,415
Brisbane, Qld. Australia
Luke's Gospel Was Written Earlier

If Acts were written about A.D. 62, then this helps us date the gospels, since the Book of Acts is the second half of a treatise written by Luke to a man named Theophilus. Since we know that the gospel of Luke was written before the Book of Acts, we can then date the Gospel of Luke sometime around A.D. 60 or before.

The Brother Who Was Well-Known May Have Been Luke

There may be further evidence for an early date for Luke's gospel. Paul wrote of a brother who was well-known among the churches for the gospel.

And we have sent along with him the brother whose fame in the gospel has spread through all the churches (2 Corinthians 8:18).​
There is ancient testimony that this refers to Luke and his written gospel. If this is speaking of Luke and the gospel he composed, then we have it well-known in the mid-fifties of the first century.

Mark May Have Been A Source For Luke

There may be a reference in the writings of Luke that he used Mark as a written source. John Mark is called a "minister" by Luke in Acts 13:5 (the Greek word huparetas). In 1:2, Luke says he derived the information for his gospel from those who were "eyewitnesses" and "ministers" of the word. The term translated "minister" is the same Greek word huparetas. It is possible that this could be a reference to Mark as one of his written sources.

Mark Was Likely Written Before Luke

Furthermore, modern scholarship has generally assumed that the Gospel of Mark was written before Luke. If this is the case, then we are somewhere in the fifties of the first century when this book was composed. Since Jesus' death and resurrection occurred approximately in the year A.D 33, these two gospels were written during the time when eyewitnesses, both friendly and unfriendly, were still alive. These eyewitnesses could either verify or falsify the information contained in the gospels.

Matthew Was Always Believed To Have Been Written First

We now go a step further by considering Matthew's gospel. According to the unanimous testimony of the early church Matthew was the first gospel written. The church father Eusebius places the date of Matthew's gospel in A.D. 41. If this is true, then we have a third independent source about the life of Christ written during the eyewitness period.

John Was An Eyewitness To The Events

The Gospel of John is usually assumed to have been the last of the four gospels composed. John testified that he was an eyewitness to the events that he recorded.

Many other signs therefore Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name John (20:30:31).​
When Were the Four Gospels Written? Jesus was crucified in 33AD, the book of Mathew was written down in 41AD, 8 years after. All of these authors were eyewitnesses of Christ.
Actually, it is the source known as 'Q' which was written earlier, and this document was the source for the synoptics. It is clear that there is ample evidence to support the contention that they were written after the fall of temple. You simply cut and pasted this fallacious argument from assertion from a religious site espousing the position of the church, which of course will attempt to place the date as close to Pilate's term as Procurator as possible. This is not the position of historians or philologists, and we've heard all this before and there is no proof for the claims of the church other than belief.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2008
58,000
4,147
Washington state
Actually, it is the source known as 'Q' which was written earlier, and this document was the source for the synoptics. It is clear that there is ample evidence to support the contention that they were written after the fall of temple. You simply cut and pasted this fallacious argument from assertion from a religious site espousing the position of the church, which of course will attempt to place the date as close to Pilate's term as Procurator as possible. This is not the position of historians or philologists, and we've heard all this before and there is no proof for the claims of the church other than belief.
If the books were written after the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70AD the books would have stated that. Since they didn't we know its before. No assertions, but simple facts. Jesus even prophesied the destruction of the temple. None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied its destruction when He said, "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down," (Luke 21:6, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1).When were the gospels written and by whom? | CARM.org
 
Dec 2014
11,096
8,415
Brisbane, Qld. Australia
If the books were written after the destruction of the Jewish Temple in 70AD the books would have stated that.
Not necessarily, especially if they were trying to present themselves as contemporary accounts.

Since they didn't we know its before.
Non-sequitur.

No assertions, but simple facts.
No, they're assertions all right.

Jesus even prophesied the destruction of the temple. None of the gospels mention the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. This is significant because Jesus had prophesied its destruction when He said, "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down," (Luke 21:6, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1).When were the gospels written and by whom? | CARM.org
That is immaterial whether he is supposed to have prophesied it or not. You are basing your position on several assumptions.
 
Likes: Michael J

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
68,912
36,534
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Jesus even prophesied the destruction of the temple.
That would not have been difficult, considering the Nevi'im discussed a Third Temple before the destruction of the second one - i.e., see Yeshayahu, Yechezkel, Malachi and Zechariah. It is not prophecy to merely repeat the words of others.
"[CARM] provides Protestants with pre-formatted "cut-and-paste" arguments to use in online forums with atheists, relativists, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Roman Catholics and members of other groups." Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry - Wikipedia
 
Likes: Michael J
Nov 2008
58,000
4,147
Washington state
Not necessarily, especially if they were trying to present themselves as contemporary accounts.



Non-sequitur.



No, they're assertions all right.



That is immaterial whether he is supposed to have prophesied it or not. You are basing your position on several assumptions.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 2008
58,000
4,147
Washington state
That would not have been difficult, considering the Nevi'im discussed a Third Temple before the destruction of the second one - i.e., see Yeshayahu, Yechezkel, Malachi and Zechariah. It is not prophecy to merely repeat the words of others.

"[CARM] provides Protestants with pre-formatted "cut-and-paste" arguments to use in online forums with atheists, relativists, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Roman Catholics and members of other groups." Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry - Wikipedia
Care to share those writings to prove Jesus repeated them?
 
Apr 2011
14,070
5,471
My mother's womb, of course.
"[CARM] provides Protestants with pre-formatted "cut-and-paste" arguments to use in online forums with atheists, relativists, Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Roman Catholics and members of other groups." Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry - Wikipedia
It's true. I used to listen to Matt Dillahunty, Tracie Harris and everyone else on the Atheist Experience destroy karm.org. It's arguably the dumbest shit on the web.
 
Likes: Blues63

Similar Discussions