Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For the past 18-months I've been writing a Christian Apologetics book tentatively titled:
"Proof the Bible is God's Truth." I've considered other title variations such as: "Verifiable Proof the Bible is God's Truth," "Proof for skeptics that the Bible is God's Inspired Word," "Proof of Truth," "Inspired", etc. While these describe the contents, none of them seems simple, concise and compelling enough.
The subject is (as the title suggests) "Verifiable Proof the Bible is Inspired by God" and addresses about a dozen proofs (Prophecy, Archaeological, Science, Literary, Claims, etc). It's written in layman's language and based on thirty-years in the ministry. I'm in a second edit and headed for publication soon.
Any thoughts or suggestions?
Thanks
Not sure I would go the "proof of a christian type god", unless you understand science.
but rather use the lessons of the cross or something like that. Jesus' lesson was Hope, salvation, and (I can't think of the word) , but those things, in the shape of a triangle, offer a person the ability to overcome (themselves and situations) through education.
Jesus's main message is understanding the world around you. He tryied to show that "we" are not what we think "we" are. Loving and understanding are not "a body". "A body" is "loving and understanding". Those things (in the form of concentration) are what "rose".
They killed him for teaching. like all bad people silince "teaching" or kill "understanding self limits" if they get in the way of marketing a religion. It happens at CD all the time by fundy atheist and fundy mental theist..
See this is where I would disagree. I believe there is only one definition of the word "truth" and truth is immutable. Look at truth tables in logic. There is no gray area in a truth table. Truth is truth. It's always true and will never be false.
I really enjoy this sort of discussion. I see your point, and do have some Logic and Critical Thinking 101 classes under my belt, but I am not an absolutist when it comes to most things.
The old situational ethics debate, for instance...yes, it is morally wrong to steal, but if a man steals a loaf of bread from someone who has plenty to prevent his family starving, etc, etc.
It may well be that there is some Ultimate Truth that is unchanging, constant and eternal. However I would still assert that truth comes in many forms and there are different truths for different people at different times.
Again, not all truth is fact, and vice versa.
It is true to me that my wife is the most beautiful woman. This likely wouldn't hold true for everyone else (wrong as they may be!)
It is true the sun comes into view each morning on earth, but one day it won't.
Jesus is said to have taught at times through parable. The essential "facts" contained in them, i e. "There was a man..." well, what was the man's name? From what village did he hail? Was he married?
Those things are utterly irrelevant to the "truth" he was trying to convey in the story.
See this is where I would disagree. I believe there is only one definition of the word "truth" and truth is immutable. Look at truth tables in logic. There is no gray area in a truth table. Truth is truth. It's always true and will never be false.
The OPs challenge is that Christian Apologetics professes to tell the Gospel of Jesus Christ we represent as "The Truth." Of course, the burden falls on the apologist, and that's what the OP's book will attempt. His book will try to allow his readers to feel his claims are true.
I'm sure it is not the intent of this thread to debate whether the Gospel is true or not. A search on City-Data Christianity would reveal that issue will not be settled.
But the OP asked for suggestions on the title of his book, and as Christians refer to the Gospel as The Truth, responses using Truth in the title will follow.
Does he have his work cut out for him? You bet! Will his book convince some? I hope so. Will it convince everybody? Of course not. I wish him the best of luck.
philosophical truth and "real" truth are not the same. Like art and real life. i don't mean good or bad.
I also believe that apologetic theism is the best. I am an apologetic atheist.
I use only what we do know to defend my view. I don't use what I "need" it to mean. Many abused children that grow up and ex-fundymentals need meaning and head nods. Mine (apologetics)may not be the only logical answer but for now, to gain more knowledge, it's the best method to gain knowledge.
Philosophical logic is great brain practice, but it acts like a popped balloon when it meets the scientific method. In real life we either put an actual observation in for "X" or we put in "I don't know". There is no If X is true then "y".
X= "an observation" or it equals "I don't know". that's it. I mean how logical is pure logic when we are stuffing "maybez" in there.
I really enjoy this sort of discussion. I see your point, and do have some Logic and Critical Thinking 101 classes under my belt, but I am not an absolutist when it comes to most things.
.
I totally agree.
Working with each other is so much better than me (an atheist) trying to push my view on a "normal" theist.
Theist have valid truths, just as i do as an atheist. Mine is not the only logical view. Thats just sick to even think would be true.
It sounds great. I almost hate to suggest it, but have you actually run these wonderful new apologetics past the 'Scoffers" to see whether they stand up? Or is the idea to keep then shielded so their fragility doesn't become evident, and they can be Sold to the faithful who will pay pure gold for much - needed bias confirmation?
Thank you. There is nothing fragile about the verifiable truth of God's Word -- Yet, not even God's Word, ways and truths are safe from the ridicule of the 'scoffers.' But, neither are the scoffers safe from Romans 1:18-20 or Psalms 14:1.
Working with each other is so much better than me (an atheist) trying to push my view on a "normal" theist.
Theist have valid truths, just as i do as an atheist. Mine is not the only logical view. Thats just sick to even think would be true.
This is part of why I consider myself an "apathetic agnostic." I see no reason to default to the belief in an external god or gods floating around out there, with foreknowledge of our fates, controlling actions in the cosmos. There has simply never been any evidence for such beings.
At the same time, I completely understand why a person might observe the beauty and diversity of life around them, or ponder the larger universe and conclude there must be a creator, or intelligent, imaginative force behind it all.
Obviously this doesn't specifically mean Yahweh, or Kronos, or Vishnu or Odin...
There's so much we yet don't know about existence and "reality." I'm simply unwilling to assert either "there is a god (or gods)" OR "gods do not exist, period."
You know, doubt and skepticism get bad raps. They are not negative states.
Skepticism doesn't mean "Oh, I don't believe that" but rather it means "I do not know, so I will continue to ask questions and try to learn and understand more."
Likewise, doubt is a skill, and we should all attempt to become better at it.
I mention this quote from Vaclav Havel often, but it resonates with me:
"Keep company with those who seek the truth; run from those who have found it."
If you think all pertinent truth and all pertinent answers are to be found in one holy book or set of religious dogma, your mind will atrophy.
Allow me to nip the notion of "Philosophical Proof" in the bud. The inference that the only Bible proof is philosophical or theological rationale - is only a biased and untrue characterization -- and not what this book is about. (Philosophical relativism is what the world, not Scripture provides).
"Objectively verifiable evidence" is things like Archaeological artifacts supporting almost every book of the Bible; indisputable manuscript evidence that Scripture/the Bible has remained unchanged for thousands of years; credible examples of truths in scripture/the Bible ... that science only "discovered" thousands of years later; clearly dated Bible prophecies that were accurately fulfilled in history and specific End Time prophecies that are still being fulfilled today.
Each section ("proof") contains specific, verifiable examples without a lot of theological jargon. This book is a consolidation of 'Evidence for the Bible's truth' (maybe that should be the title?). One objective is to help Christians and others overcome the world's tendency to isolate and simply parrot out-of-context 'sound bytes' and anecdotal information in their attempts to discredit the Bible, Christ and God Himself.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton
Allow me to nip the notion of "Philosophical Proof" in the bud. The inference that the only Bible proof is philosophical or theological rationale - is only a biased and untrue characterization -- and not what this book is about. (Philosophical relativism is what the world, not Scripture provides).
"Objectively verifiable evidence" is things like Archaeological artifacts supporting almost every book of the Bible; indisputable manuscript evidence that Scripture/the Bible has remained unchanged for thousands of years; credible examples of truths in scripture/the Bible ... that science only "discovered" thousands of years later; clearly dated Bible prophecies that were accurately fulfilled in history and specific End Time prophecies that are still being fulfilled today.
Each section ("proof") contains specific, verifiable examples without a lot of theological jargon.
So tell us about the massive finds of evidence of camp sites in the Sinai which 2 million people wandered about for 40 years? You ARE aware that one can walk from Cairo to Eilat to Jerusalem in 7 days, right? Even my 5 year old grandson can navigate by the North Star. And he is not divinely inspired.
How are these people "under attack" exactly? Are they being prevented from worship? Driven from their homes? Imprisoned, or tortured in the streets? Are their churches being burned? Are they being forced to convert to other religions, or engage in some activity they consider sinful?
On another note, I think "buzzable" is a fine word!
Also, while I may not share your faith, I sincerely admire and applaud you for completing a book on a subject that is so meaningful to you. It's more than I've accomplished. I wish you the best of luck and success with it!
1). Throughout history, there have been approximately 70-million Christian martyrs -- with an estimated 100,000 Christians murdered for their faith annually in modern times. Christians are being prevented from worship, driven from their homes, imprisoned, tortured in the streets, with their churches being burned ... and being forced to renounce their faith in Christ or face death throughout the world. (These are our Christian brothers and sisters and their persecution is our persecution). While the occurrence of these is not as prevalent in the United States, it is a very real global threat to the "Body of Christ" that does not need to happen to every individual to validate its reality. (Wouldn't it hurt you if your children or brothers and sisters were being violently persecuted for their faith?)
Is there any doubt that there is a growing hatred of Christians in America? (It is certainly evident on the CD Christianity forum). But, in America, there is a different type of more sophisticated liberal persecution that seek reverse discrimination of Christian freedom in the public forum, while championing the rights of those who would destroy Christians. We live in a time of "cyber-bullying" which is every bit as real and hurtful as physical torment and bullying ... does anyone honestly dispute that?
Maybe we should coin "buzzable" - I like it too.
Thank you for your encouragement -- I have no problem with those who do not share my faith, but to have a reasonable and conclusive discussion, a common 'Truth Standard' is necessary. Mine is the Bible and I intend to defend that choice in a credible, rational, fact-based manner in this book.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton
1). Throughout history, there have been approximately 70-million Christian martyrs -- with an estimated 100,000 Christians murdered for their faith annually in modern times. Christians are being prevented from worship, driven from their homes, imprisoned, tortured in the streets, with their churches being burned ... and being forced to renounce their faith in Christ or face death throughout the world. (These are our Christian brothers and sisters and their persecution is our persecution). While the occurrence of these is not as prevalent in the United States, it is a very real global threat to the "Body of Christ" that does not need to happen to every individual to validate its reality. (Wouldn't it hurt you if your children or brothers and sisters were being violently persecuted for their faith?)
Is there any doubt that there is a growing hatred of Christians in America? (It is certainly evident on the CD Christianity forum). But, in America, there is a different type of more sophisticated liberal persecution that seek reverse discrimination of Christian freedom in the public forum, while championing the rights of those who would destroy Christians. We live in a time of "cyber-bullying" which is every bit as real and hurtful as physical torment and bullying ... does anyone honestly dispute that?
Maybe we should coin "buzzable" - I like it too.
Thank you for your encouragement -- I have no problem with those who do not share my faith, but to have a reasonable and conclusive discussion, a common 'Truth Standard' is necessary. Mine is the Bible and I intend to defend that choice in a credible, rational, fact-based manner in this book.
Atheists don't hate christians or muslims or jews or zorastrians. If the religions stay out of secular life, no one would have a problem. Don't try and bring your prayers to school, don't try and put your commandments in front of legislatures, and don't try impose your religious tenets on the secular population.
Keep your version of what you think is holy in the home and your places of worship. Try and put it any where else, and your going to hear from us.
It's pretty simple actually.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I almost hate to suggest it, but have you actually run these wonderful new apologetics past the 'Scoffers" to see whether they stand up? Or is the idea to keep then shielded so their fragility doesn't become evident, and they can be Sold to the faithful who will pay pure gold for much - needed bias confirmation?
