Why Dont You Guys Believe The Bible?

Post by **_Jim from covina** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 11:31 am

This is a piggy back question from my other last year regarding innerancy. It is funny that almost everyone argued that the bible was reliable at minimum, and inspired and inerrant and most. YET....................

It seems as if many of you dont actually practice what you preach. I.E.................in Rev. Jesus made it clear that the time was "at hand" and "near"..............yet many of you dont believe jesus.

It is futile to get into a "word" study on what near means. It is clear! Ad hoc interpretive committees to fit one's presuppositions re: "futurism" are not valid. When the words are used in the rest of the n.t. it means what it says. Furthermore, 2pet. will not rescue you. Dont bother playing with God and time, etc. All through the bible god speaks to us in our language. Why would god now want to deceive us or confuse us. The only acceptable answer is that the book of Rev. should NOT be in the bible.

Secondly, the apostles concurred with jesus, and preached that the "end" was near and at hand..............but again, it seems if many dont believe this either. Were they confused? Were they just simply wrong??

Why is this??? This is distressing, considering the strenuous arguments for inspiration and inerrancy and reliability of the bible. How is it that some of you get to decide when to believe in a particular verse or not???

Post by **_Derek** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 12:39 pm

I would say that "near" in most of the verses that are in question, are refering to the end of the Old Covenant, when Jesus "came" and destroyed the temple in Jerusalem in AD70. It is not talking about the end of the world.

I would recommend going to Steve Gregg's website and checking out "When Shall These Things Be" under the "Topical Lectures" link. He explains it all very well there.

Post by **_Allyn** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:07 pm

Another great series is on the Olivet Discourse
tape 1A http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/bible ... c_9_1a.mp3

tape 1B (really good)http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/bible ... c_9_1b.mp3

tape 2A (still Better) http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/bible ... c_9_2a.mp3

tape 2B (excellent) http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/bible ... c_9_2b.mp3

Post by **_SoaringEagle** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 3:46 pm

You can also go to the topic called Did Jesus Return in the first century, and see some answers there.

Post by **_SoaringEagle** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 4:05 pm

The Returning King: A Guide to the Book of Revelation
by Vern S. Poythress

Commentary
Prologue, 1:1-3

The main portion of Revelation (1:4-22:21) has the form of a letter (see Introduction: Structure). 1:1-3 functions as its prologue. It helps to orient readers to the kind of contents they may expect. Stress is placed on the divine authority of the message (from God and Jesus Christ), its certainty (“must” in v. 1), and its crucial relevance (v. 3). God makes thorough provision for the communication process: the message originates with God the Father, is given to Jesus Christ, and is made known to John through an angel (v. 1). John testifies by writing it (v. 2), and all are encouraged to read and hear (v. 3).

Though Revelation comes in symbolic form, it is understandable. It is “revelation,” disclosing rather than hiding truth (v. 1). It is for “his servants,” not a special elite (v. 1). God expects us to “take to heart what is written,” to profit spiritually (v. 3). A blessing encourages people to read and hear (v. 3).

The book identifies itself as the revelation of Jesus Christ. This expression might mean a revelation with Jesus Christ as its source. Or it might mean a revelation with Jesus Christ as its principal content. Both possibilities express important truths.

Two factors weigh decisively in favor of the first meaning (Jesus Christ is source). First, the immediate context in 1:1-3 focuses on the means and channels of revelation. God the Father is the ultimate source, Jesus Christ is the mediator, he sends “his angel,” John writes the message, and others read it aloud (1:3). Second, though the rest of the book does indeed have a sustained Christological focus, the content is Trinitarian and not exclusively Christological in the narrowest sense. The focus is also on what happens in history. The events are mediated by Christ, but the events can still be distinguished from him.

How can the events take place “soon” (v. 1) if now almost 2000 years have passed? See 22:6, 7, 10, 12, 20. Spiritual war takes place throughout the church age, and the seven churches will soon experience all the dimensions of the conflict. Moreover, the “last days” of Old Testament prophecy have been inaugurated by Christ’s resurrection (Acts 2:16-17). The time of waiting is over, and God is conducting the final phase of his victorious warfare against evil. By such reckoning, today is “the last hour” (1 John 2:18).

The wording in 1:1 seems to be built on Dan. 2:45. In Dan. 2:45 God showed King Nebuchadnezzar “what will take place in the future.” In Rev. 1:1 God shows his servants what must take place “soon.” In Daniel the vision is impressively far-ranging. It starts with Nebuchadnezzar’s time, but then reaches out to encompass subsequent pagan world empires until the times when God’s kingdom is established (Dan. 2:44-45). This kingdom of God was inaugurated by the first coming of Christ (Mark 1:15; Luke 11:20; Rom. 14:17), but its consummation is still to come. We live “in the last days” (2 Tim. 3:1, 12; Heb. 1:2), in the middle of fulfillments that are still working themselves out. Daniel spoke of events that, from his perspective, were in the far future. These events are now happening around us. Hence, Revelation properly says that they are “soon,” in contrast to the distance that Daniel saw. We are to understand that these days—from the first century until now—are the “end times” of spiritual conflict, with “many antichrists” (1 John 2:18). Whether a secular clock measures the time until the Second Coming as a few hours or many centuries is irrelevant.

Verses 2 and 3 characterize Revelation in helpful ways. It is the testimony of Jesus Christ (v. 2). Because of the imminence of persecution threatening to suppress Christian witness (17:6), Revelation is full of the theme of witness. Jesus Christ is the preeminent witness (1:5; 3:14; 19:11). Imitation of him may include martyrdom (12:11). Revelation itself is a witness, a testimony. It intends in turn to strengthen the testimony of its readers. Its message carries full divine authority and authenticity (22:20, 6, 16; 19:10).

Post by **_Allyn** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 4:44 pm

SoaringEagle wrote:You can also go to the topic called Did Jesus Return in the first century, and see some answers there.

Help me to find this. I looked but did not see this lecture.

Post by **_mattrose** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:04 pm

I think the poster was referring to a thread, not one of steve's lectures

The thread can be found below

http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.php?t=602

Post by **_Paidion** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 8:51 pm

Why is this??? This is distressing, considering the strenuous arguments for inspiration and inerrancy and reliability of the bible. How is it that some of you get to decide when to believe in a particular verse or not???

Jim, the various stands we take is not a matter of "believing in a particular verse or not".

Most Biblical interpretation comes from a foundation of thought which everyone has, either from his upbringing, or as a result of his personal study. Because of everyone's personal foundation of thought, it is common to think that one's own interpretation is correct, and that other interpretations are simply "not believing the Bible". But this is not the case.

Dozens of "Christian" groups claim to believe every word of the Bible, and that every part is "the written word of God". Yet each group has a wide variety of interpretations. There is even a wide variety of interpretations within a single church group ---- unless it is an authoritarian group that requires everyone to think the same.

Just consider the varying views on the Deity.

The United Pentecostals and Apostolic people believe that the Deity is a single Individual who expresses Himself as the Father, and as the Son, and as the Holy Spirit.

Baptists, Pentecostals, and Lutherans believe that the Deity is three Individuals who are yet One in some mysterious way.

Mormons believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three individual Gods.

Unitarians and Christadelphians believe that only the Father is God, and that the Son of God came into being when Jesus was born from Mary. The Holy Spirit is the power of God.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only the Father is God, and that the Son of God pre-existed as the highest created angel. The Holy Spirit is the power of God.

Most Christians from the first and second centuries believed that the Father begat the Son before all ages, and thus the Son was the only begotten Son, and was therefore Deity in the same sense as His Father.
The Holy Spirit is the Persons of the Father and the Son which indwell the faithful.

The problem is not that any of these groups do not believe the Bible. The problem is that each interpret it differently, depending on their foundation of thought.

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:02 pm

It is futile to get into a "word" study on what near means. It is clear! Ad hoc interpretive committees to fit one's presuppositions re: "futurism" are not valid. When the words are used in the rest of the n.t. it means what it says. Furthermore, 2pet. will not rescue you. Dont bother playing with God and time, etc. All through the bible god speaks to us in our language. Why would god now want to deceive us or confuse us. The only acceptable answer is that the book of Rev. should NOT be in the bible.

Secondly, the apostles concurred with jesus, and preached that the "end" was near and at hand..............but again, it seems if many dont believe this either. Were they confused? Were they just simply wrong??

Jim, You seem to be distressed that we all don't see this the way you see it or am i wrong? We are physical,carnal creatures and we are used to literal words yet Jesus said his words are "spirit" and "life" therefore should it be so strange that carnal creatures like us may not understand things of the spirit the same way?
If i'm not mistaken the apostles hoped Jesus would return soon but they never preached exactly when because even Jesus did'nt know,so how could they.
As far as Rev goes many here believe it was written in the 60s and did refer to a soon event which was the destruction of Jerusalem and the passing of the Old Covenant.

Post by **_dexter** » Fri Oct 06, 2006 6:37 pm

Scientific evidences that the things written in the Old Testament does not contradict the archeological findings:
A century ago, many learned scholars doubted that the peoples and languages mentioned in the Bible had ever existed. However, as modern archaeology developed and more of the ancient inscriptions were deciphered, they opened a new view of the historical accuracy of the Bible.

A. The Rosetta Stone. Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Egypt in 1798, sending teams of scholars and artists with his army. They surveyed the great ruins of ancient Egypt that were still above ground. While digging a trench near the city of Rosetta, some of Napoleon’s soldiers turned up the famous trilingual inscription known as the Rosetta Stone. This marvelous find was written to celebrate the ascension of the Hellenistic ruler Ptolemy Epiphanes to the throne of Egypt on March 27, 196 b.c. The inscription had approximately the same text in three languages and three scripts. The first was hieroglyphic Egyptian, an ancient dialect; the second was demotic Egyptian, a much later dialect; and the third was koine Greek in the familiar Greek alphabet.
The stone was taken back to Europe. The Greek text could be read easily enough, but the hieroglyphics were puzzling. Most scholars just considered them to be some sort of secret code or symbols not connected with speech. Many tried to break this code and failed. Then the young scholar Jean François Champollion compared segments of the three inscriptions. He began to recognize that the hieroglyphics were not merely pictographs or symbols, but phonetic characters. He was actually able to identify the names of the famous Egyptian rulers, Rameses and Thutmose. Within a half century, scholars could decipher and read most Middle Kingdom hieroglyphics.

Packer, J.I. ; Tenney, Merrill Chapin ; White, William: Nelson's Illustrated Manners and Customs of the Bible. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1995, S. 335