My Photo
Mobilise this Blog

Google

InvestigateDaily

INVESTIGATEMAGAZINE.TV

Kiwiblog

New Zealand Conservative

InvestigatePodcast

AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] investigatemagazine.com and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« Deborah Coddington sucking on lemons? | Main | Hilarious »

Comments

peter

Don't panic Andrei. The Roman Catholic Church accounts for just 50 per cent of all Christians.

Although from time to time there is discussion about which denominations and which individuals are real Christians.

And this may concern some Catholics especially in the hierarchy, who promote a view that they are the only true Christian church.

Likewise Muslims that are Shi'ite or Sunni. They are really 2 separate religions or denominations.

Don't worry, there is plenty of disharmony and conflict within religions to ensure there is no winner in religion.

andrei

Although from time to time there is discussion about which denominations and which individuals are real Christians.

Shows how little you know Peter.

Christians are all members of the Church established by Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The denominational thing is just the devil at work sowing confusion amongst those would follow Our Lord.

fugley

andrei, I am still trying to understand this "concept".

God can do everything except defeat satan. sn't that a bit lame of god?

Or does god prefer lots and lots of competing churches, a sort of tower of babel of religion? You remember that, don't you, just another one of god's paranoid days.

googoocachoo

Oh, Andrei, DON'T WORRY! I'm sure the next wars of glorious liberation in the Middle East will kill plenty of those inconvienient Muslim children!

Andrew McIntosh

Hi Fugley,

Think of it this way.

The launch of D-Day spelled the end for Hitler even though WWII was not yet over.

So it is with Christ, He came for this reason to destroy the works of the devil.

The cross and resurrection of Christ from the grave represent D-Day for the devil on planet earth.

At 100 AD there was 1 Christian for every 360 non-Christian, which at the end of last century had become 1 christain for every seven non-christians. That ratio is still coming down!

The reality is that the victory won by Christ is being implemented through the allies (Christ's Body) who are for all their shortcomings are enforcing that victory in the earth.

The outworking of this victory is clearly set out in the Bible, and is being fulfilled in an ongoing way historically.

I am looking forward to the day when "... the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Best Regards, Andrew


peter

Andrew McIntosh:

Fire and Brimstone are referenced in both Genesis and Revelation.

Genesis: Fictitious creation story meant for little children.

Revelation: Writer on vary bad acid or party pills.

Andrew McIntosh - make sure you use up your supply of party pills before deadline 6 months hence! That way you may wean yourself off Genesis and Revelation. Actually quite appropriate that they be the "bookends" of the bible. Should be seen as a warning of merits.

dad4justice

Peter you have a screw loose you weirdo nutbar.

Andrew McIntosh

Hi Peter,

I used to think like you before I got to know the author of the Bible!

This same author created time (Genesis) and will end time (Revelation).

The Lord Jesus Christ is the author! One day every knee shall bow before Him.

I choose to bow my knee willingly everday before the Lord.

My prayer for you is that you will not have to bow your knee unwillingly before Him.

By then it will be too late for you to repent and your words will haunt you for the rest of eternity.


peter

Andrew McIntosh

Sorry to hear that the oft repeated phrase "Hear the Word of God" has affected your judgement.

Anyone can see that the Bible is an anthology of writings by varied authors. Compare the Psalms with John and tell me it ain't so.

In fact scholars have done a lot of work on this, and proved that in some cases, a single book may have had multiple authors. Help me here biblical scholars - was it Acts that was a concatenation of two?

Genesis - well you could try it on very young children.

Revelation - you would have to be completely nutty to read too much into that. I know one evangelist that did - Garner Ted Armstrong! Those interested, google on Garner Ted and see what became of him!

Or look at these:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,903502,00.html

http://www.rickross.com/reference/wwchurch/wwchurch7.html

Video:
http://www.archive.org/details/GarnerTedArmstrong

ropata

peter,
I'm no Bible scholar, but I think Isaiah may have had 2 authors; not sure about other books. Genesis may be a collection of several lesser works. There are a lot more scholarly commentaries on Genesis and Revelation than your silly ignorance.

Andrew McIntosh

Hi Peter,

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.

I think we can reasonably agree that we both share different presuppositions.

For me the question is how can we test our presuppositions in such a way that an objective conclusion may be reached?

In my own reading of scripture having had the opportunity to read it right through over 10 times I am yet to see one proven contradiction!

Yet the Bible was written by 40 known authors over a period of 1800 years!

So what this indicates to me is that the interlocking harmony of scripture is beyond the ability of human intellect to achieve.

The Bible is not just a book of words, it is more than that! For example it also contains patterns.

These patterns are numerical, acrostic, and include equidistant letter sequences codes that kind of which we would find by applying cryptanlysis.

For example take the book of Genesis.

Gen 1:1 reads "In the beginning God created the heaven and earth." This sentence is translated from 7 hebrew words.

Based on the heptadic structure of structure in the Hebrew language we can see that there are 7 hebrew words, 4 x 7 number of letters, the first three words are based on 2 x 7 letters, the last four hebrew words 2 x 7 letters, the forth and fifth word have seven letters, the sixth and seventh words have 2 x 7 letters, the key words God, heaven, earth have 2 x 7 letters, and the four remaining letters have 2 x 7 letters.

In addition the letters have a nuerical value (gematria), which are provocative. For example if you compare the first, middle and last letters you get 133 = 19 x 7, whereas the numeric value of the first and last letter of all seven words is 1393 = 199 x 7.

What I have found is that this heptadic structure of scripture is found throughout the Bible.

Yet it is not just a pattern based on the number 7 it is other numbers that form this Biblical numerology.

Try and write a Biblical genealogy so that all the words are divisible by seven evenly.

and where the number of letters is also divisible by seven.

Where the number of vowels and consonants are also divisible by seven.

Where the number of words beginning with a vowel are divisible by seven.

Where the number of words that egin with a consonant are divisible by seven.

Where the number of words that occur more than once is divisible by seven.

Where the number of words that begin in more than one form is divisible by seven.

Where the number of words that occur in only one form is divisble by seven.

Where the number of nouns is divisible by seven.

Only sevens words shall not be nouns.

The number of names in the genealogy is divisible by seven.

Only seven other kinds of nouns are permitted.

The number of males names is divisble by seven.

The number of generations shall be 21, also divisible by seven.

You will find such such a genealogy in Matthew Chapter 1!

So this then raises the logical question, how did such patterns arise when these patterns clearly indicate a cohesion that spans both time and authorship?

Dr Ivan Panin's analysis of these patterns amounts to 43,000 pages of analysis.

When the Nobel research foundation of Los Angelos investigated his work regarding his statement that the Bible could not have been written except by inspiration of God himself, their verdict was "So far as our investigation has proceeded, we find evidence overwhelmingly in favour of such a statement."

My souvenir from Oxford University has the Word of God in the logo and seven seals down the left hand side.

In the book of revelation chapter five there were seven seals that no one could open them with one exception "behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof."

I tried to read the Bible before I was a Christian and I found that it did not make sense. I could not fathom it out and I treated it with disdain as if it were a mythological book.

When I had a personal encounter with the author of the Bible the Lord Jesus Christ I suddenly found that it was not a dry book after all but a book that is spiritully empowered and it's precepts have changed my life in ways that I could never have imaginged for the better.

Peter, you are free to express your pre-suppositions to the contrary, just as I am to you.

On the basis of objective evidence I think that you are wrong, something that gives me no pleasure in stating.

I hope and pray that you would examine the evidence openly and for yourself. Check out Chuck Missler's "Cosmic Codes" book.

Have a look into F. C. Payne's classic "The Seal of God".

Check out Dr Jeffrey Satinover's work on the Bible Codes. (His latest work is the brilliant book "The qantum brain" is a great resource).

There are many more that I could mention, but that would get you started.

God Bless you Richly, Andrew


Danyl Mclauchlan

In my own reading of scripture having had the opportunity to read it right through over 10 times I am yet to see one proven contradiction!

The gospels alone contradict each other on hundreds of different points. For the most famous example, take a look at your NT and see if you can come up with comprehensive answers to these questions:

(a) who found Jesus's empty tomb.

(b) who or what did they see in there.

peter

Andrew McIntosh..

What has numerology got to do with all this?

I don't see that the mathematical patterns you have fitted have any relevance to me, and frankly who would be interested?

And I simply can't believe you have read the complete Bible 10 times. Best advice I would have for you is to broaden yourself, read a wider variety of literature covering many more perspectives than the Bible. At best, the vast majority of the Bible could be regarded as a reference. How often have you read the Oxford Dictionary cover to cover. I see we have new phone books due some time - I've heard that the Auckland one is pretty sizable - see if you can read it 10 times. Oh and I hear a god has been at work on it - all the A surnames come first, followed by the Bs ...

Jim

Danyl

The gospels alone contradict each other on hundreds of different points.

This is the sort of statement made by non-historians. I assume you are talking about inconsistencies such as how many people visited the tomb and what they saw there. This is known as eyewitness variability and is not considered contradictory in a normal historical analysis. In fact, it is expected in any authentic eyewitness account. You have to look for the points of agreement, like you would in a criminal trial. For instance, in the gospel story, the following facts are known:

Women went to the tomb early on the Sunday to embalm Jesus' body. They found the tomb empty and the sealing stone removed. They went back to the disciples to tell them about it.

Now if one Gospel said that Jesus had risen while another said he turned into a giant purple dragon and flew away, that would be a contradiction. There has to be an irreconcilable difference between the accounts for them to be contradictory.

PS Heard you had a horrible time in Wellington ED. Hope you are feeling better.

Jim

Peter

Andrew is obviously talking about the uniqueness of the Bible. Apparently you have no rational response to this and thus resort to mockery. You are exceptionally strange.

Danyl Mclauchlan

PS Heard you had a horrible time in Wellington ED. Hope you are feeling better.

Thanks Jim - I knew I was REALLY sick when I couldn't even fight with people online.

This is the sort of statement made by non-historians. I assume you are talking about inconsistencies such as how many people visited the tomb and what they saw there. This is known as eyewitness variability and is not considered contradictory in a normal historical analysis. In fact, it is expected in any authentic eyewitness account. You have to look for the points of agreement, like you would in a criminal trial. For instance, in the gospel story, the following facts are known:

Women went to the tomb early on the Sunday to embalm Jesus' body. They found the tomb empty and the sealing stone removed. They went back to the disciples to tell them about it.

Okay, point (1) Andrew isn't just claiming that the Gospels are a normal historical text, he's arguing that they're magical books written by the creator of the universe and that they are never contradictory or wrong. So we shouldn't hold it to the normal standards of a historical document to examine the merits of Andrew's claims.

(2) Some of the accounts are, indeed contradictory. In Mark the woman arrive at the tomb, find the stone has been rolled away, enter and find a young man within.
In Matthew the entrance to the tomb is blocked by the stone. There is an earthquake when the woman arrive and an angel rolls away the stone.
In John Mary brings Peter and another disciple to the tomb.

These details are impossible to synthesize - I agree that normally you'd just look for points of agreement, but since Andrew argues these books are flawless that isn't really acceptable as a solution.

And there are a number of other high profile contradictions: the date of the last supper varies between gospels, and all four have Jesus getting crucified at different times of the day. They also all give him different last words.

Jim

Danyl

I see where your coming from. However,
I think you are not seeing the woods for the trees. The most remarkable thing about the bible is not in it's inconsistencies (they are to be expected) but in its consistencies. Considering that there have been at least 40 authors spanning nearly 2000 years the overall cohesion of the books are nothing short of remarkable.

It is a common error to think that the bible should be treated non-historically because it claims to be the inspired word of God (many Christians make this mistake, too). Inspired means that God is directing the truth in the bible. He is not changing the writers personality, style of argument or recollection of facts. The writers are simply being directed to record as truthfully as they can and being directed towards the truth in their understanding.

Thus Paul's letters contain his sometimes confusing style of argument and reference but what he is saying is the truth because the holy Spirit has directed it so. The differences in gospel eye-witness accounts confirm the truth of the narrative - that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead - because they ring true.

We can play around with the fact and fit them together. Perhaps Mary ran ahead and arrived at the tomb first. The stone was still there but rolled away with the earthquake. Then the other women arrived. One stayed outside and saw a figure in the tomb and assumed it was a man, perhaps the gardener. One went into the tomb the whole way and saw two angels, one saw only one of the because she went only part of the way in. And so on and so forth. It really doesn't matter does it? The tomb was empty and Jesus isn't in it. That's the difference between inspired truth and plain fact. Truth is based on fact but not in the same way that scientific theory is based on fact.

Danyl Mclauchlan

The most remarkable thing about the bible is not in it's inconsistencies (they are to be expected) but in its consistencies. Considering that there have been at least 40 authors spanning nearly 2000 years the overall cohesion of the books are nothing short of remarkable.

The Old Testament is known to have been redacted and compiled from separate texts into a single work sometime in the 5th century BC (some scholars postulate that this was done by Ezra) so consistencies across this text become a lot less astonishing when you realise its all been edited by a single individual.

Even so, the text is still full of thousands of contradictions, the two versions of Genesis being the most famous.

We can play around with the fact and fit them together. Perhaps Mary ran ahead and arrived at the tomb first . . .

You can, but then all you're doing is writing a fifth Gospel with even less of a relationship to the truth than the original four.

Your hypothesis as to the inspiration of the Bible is pretty comic to this cold-hearted atheist - its Gods perfect truth, except for when its not and even then it still is - but it does enjoy the advantage of being impossible to disprove.

Jim

The Old Testament is known to have been redacted and compiled from separate texts into a single work sometime in the 5th century BC

No, it's not. This is just an unproven hypothesis from liberal bible scholars. There is exactly ZERO evidence for this.

Even so, the text is still full of thousands of contradictions, the two versions of Genesis being the most famous.

Yup. World famous in liberal bible scholar land. This is part of the Documentary Hypothesis which was laughable even in its heyday at the turn of the last century. It and its cousin, Form Criticism, subjected the bible to bizarre analysis based on the scholars presupposition that the supernatural doesn't exist.

This is the equivalent of analyzing Shakespeare on the basis that he couldn't write plays...

You can, but then all you're doing is writing a fifth Gospel...

Not quite. When you try to take four separate eye-witness accounts and put them together, its called a reconstruction. The police and the media do this all the time.

Your hypothesis as to the inspiration of the Bible is pretty comic to this cold-hearted atheist

Glad you are amused. And I'm sure you are not really "cold-hearted"! You are quite correct in saying that it is impossible to disprove. But that is the way of supernatural things, isn't it? After all, if we could subject them to rigorous scientific proof, they would be natural and not supernatural, wouldn't they?

Andrew McIntosh

Hi Danyl,

Danyl writes "Okay, point (1) Andrew isn't just claiming that the Gospels are a normal historical text, he's arguing that they're magical books written by the creator of the universe and that they are never contradictory or wrong. So we shouldn't hold it to the normal standards of a historical document to examine the merits of Andrew's claims."

Not quite Danyl!

While I certainly believe that the Bible is inerrant I am not saying that the Bible is above or beyond examination!

You claim I think otherwise? Can you please point me to any statement which you attribute me to wherein I state that the Bible should not be examined?

Danyl wrote "(2) Some of the accounts are, indeed contradictory. In Mark the woman arrive at the tomb, find the stone has been rolled away, enter and find a young man within.
In Matthew the entrance to the tomb is blocked by the stone. There is an earthquake when the woman arrive and an angel rolls away the stone.
In John Mary brings Peter and another disciple to the tomb.

These details are impossible to synthesize - I agree that normally you'd just look for points of agreement, but since Andrew argues these books are flawless that isn't really acceptable as a solution."

Dr Gleason J. Archer Jr. has synthesised the resurrection accounts in his "Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficultes" which would appear to contradict your assertion that such a task is impossible?

Gleason notes "A careful examination of these four records in comparison with one another demonstrates that they are not contradictory, despite the charges leveled by some critics".

Gleason goes on to provide such a synethsis, which I would encourage you to check out for yourself.

In "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel we find the following reference in relation to the consistency of the eye witness accounts.

"...Simon Greenleef of the Harvard Law school, one of history's most important legal figures, and the author of an influential treatise on evidence.
After studying the consistency among the four gospel writers, he offered this evaluation: "There is enough of a discrepancy to show that there could have been no previous concert among them; and at the same time such substantial agreement as to show that they all were independent narrators of the same transaction."

Perhaps I can give you a better example of where I am coming from with respect to testing the veracity of scripture? Take the example of the darkness at noon at Christ's crucifixion.

You will find three accounts of this event in Matthew 7 v 45, Mark 15 v 33, and Luke 23 v 45.

Grant Jeffrey points out in his book "Unveiling Mysteries of the Bible". "It is a remarkable account because, although it would be impossible for a natural elipse to occur at that time of year (the Passover feast), three of the Gospel writers recorded this extroadinary miracle, and two pagan historians, Thallus and Phlegon, also recorded the astonishing event in their histories."

From my point of view I am very happy for the Bible to tested to the normal standards of an historical document to test my or anyone elses claims!


The comments to this entry are closed.