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.
Romans claims Paul's authorship and Acts of the Apostles claims to include an objective and factual narrative of Paul's ministry.
Assuming for the sake of argument that Romand was written by Paul from prison, he was a Pharisee and would have committed key scriptures to memory. That is not extraordinary or unusual. And Paul was, for his day, an intellectual. So I see this as suggestive that Paul was an intelligent and diligent student of the OT which he was able to put to good use. That's a far cry from miraculous though.
The rhetoric and the case that he lays out systematically in Romans is far more than just a few key verses that he would have memorized as a Pharisee.
Quote:
It says things that are not incompatible with Crucifixion. But it doesn't describe crucifixion and it can just as well be describing any other form of death or indeed existential crisis. It's describing the common human experience of feeling forsaken by god and man and the hope that somehow future experience will be different, thus justifying faith in either.
"All my bones are out of joint" for example can be literal or (far more likely in *ahem* context) figurative.
And Jesus' bones were out of joint. Crucifixion would have caused that.
Quote:
But we are pattern matching creatures and we look for matches and confirmation bias provides them. If the author is writing about bones being out of joint and being thirsty, he MUST be literal and he MUST be channeling the future words of Jesus, because god and prophecy and theology.
So I read Psalm 22 and see someone ranting about abandonment and suffering and hoping for some mercy and you read it and see a particular person describing a particular event, related much later in a particular document that for all we know was made up to FIT Psalm 22.
This is how all prophecy works. It's general enough to read into it or fit it in with whatever you want to. Not actually impressive at all.
He was abandoned and he was persecuted and suffering on the cross. He could "count all his bones" as they were not broken -- which was what would have happened to any crucified man. He had a "pack of dogs" around him -- gentiles. You can say that it doesn't describe it...and ok--I get it. You don't want to believe.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,928,903 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
We believe what the individual books of the Bible attest to themselves, and other books. We read it and recognize that it is what it says it is. I'm firmly convinced Romans is an inspired work after spending a semester studying it -- recognizing that for a man in the 1st Century to write it and reference the OT as many times as he did, it's inspired.
Besides that, we can look at the inspired prophecies that came true. Psalm 22 was written about 1000 years before crucifixion, yet it describes crucifixion. We know that there were amazing details of Jesus' birth and his life that were predicted hundreds and thousands of years prior to his living.
I know...none of these will convince you. That's ok--it's not my job to argue you into belief.
There are those that argue Nostradamus has told prophecies that have come true. When things are told in such a general way that any interpretation can be put on them, their veracity is certainly questionable.
What you stated is that by studying Romans, you are using the bible to proof the bible. How does answer the question of proving it is inspired? How does Romans and Paul's teachings proof the inspired word of Exodus? Or Numbers (which I think is one of the most boring books in the bible).
Could it be possible that Romans and the Gospels were written knowing what was "prophecied" in the OT and followed that narrative to look as if it came true?
Do you think Jesus thought: Well, the Scriptures say I can't remain in the tomb since I am the Messiah, the one promised to come, so, in order to pull the wool over the eyes of these Israelites, I'll have to have God raise me from the dead in order to fulfill the Scripture?
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,928,903 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Do you think Jesus thought: Well, the Scriptures say I can't remain in the tomb since I am the Messiah, the one promised to come, so, in order to pull the wool over the eyes of these Israelites, I'll have to have God raise me from the dead in order to fulfill the Scripture?
Where outside of the bible is there any mention of jesus? The acknowledge forgery in Josephus is not any proof.
It's never going to be a question of "knowing," cupper. It just isn't, period.
As many times and in as many different ways as this has been asked in the past and will again be asked in the future, this will NEVER reconcile, and I think even the most steadfastly religious realize this deep down.
Where outside of the bible is there any mention of jesus? The acknowledge forgery in Josephus is not any proof.
The Christian historians who wrote the gospels and Acts are just as credible as non Christian historians. So that is a fallacy on your part to suggest that if no non Christians historians wrote about Jesus that therefore they are incorrect in their history.
Furthermore, you don't know there weren't any. There may have been reams and reams of historical documents written but which have been lost to time, wars, burning of Rome, destruction by the Jews themselves etc.
How can one know if those in the bible truly had a relationship with God?
You have to try it yourself to Know.
I've had some of the same experiences with God as those of the bible.
So I Know He is real.
But remember there were even those in the bible
who had experiences with God but still did not desire a relationship with Him.
God had the false Prophet Baal prophesy the blessings of God's people to a King who paid him to curse them.
Baal even said, he wished he could be blessed as God's people.
But he had no desire to be one of God's people.
And in the end he even caused them to stumble.
So, did he Know God was real? Yes. But just knowing still isn't enough.
And Jesus' bones were out of joint. Crucifixion would have caused that.
Lots of things cause bones to be out of joint. Falling off cliffs, being run over by oxcarts, being beaten by thugs with clubs. Not to mention that we speak metaphorically of being "out of joint" which is probably what is going on here. It is just a bunch of flowery ways of saying "this situation is horrible to me and I feel awful about it".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
He was abandoned and he was persecuted and suffering on the cross. He could "count all his bones" as they were not broken -- which was what would have happened to any crucified man. He had a "pack of dogs" around him -- gentiles. You can say that it doesn't describe it...and ok--I get it. You don't want to believe.
It is simply an objective fact that lots of people are abandoned and persecuted, suffer physically without broken bones, and are surrounded by real or metaphorical dogs. The vast majority of people who suffer those things are not being crucified, and are not Jesus, and are not Jesus being crucified. You are simply seeing an association that isn't warranted.
So it goes with prophecy generally.
By the way, me making this observation hasn't got anything to do with my desire or lack thereof to believe (and real belief has nothing to do with desire anyway, but with my perception of the probability that a thing is true based on available evidence and logical argument). And the validity of the observation has nothing to do with my lack of desire to believe, even if that WERE the case.
What you may be confusing here is that YOU seeing this in an overdetermined way as referring ONLY to a particular event that happened to a particular person, reflects YOUR desire TO believe. I on the other hand am interested in what the passage actually can be safely said to refer to. Knowing, as I do, that the Psalms are poetry, and are highly symbolic and evocative rather than literal, I see it as reflections on the human condition and spirituality written thousands of years ago, which has been repurposed as prophecy by well meaning folks such as yourself.
Best way to know that the Bible is the inspired Words of God is to repent of sin Love God and , seek God out and obey God commands and convert to Jesus Christ the Saviour ......... Where when God sees that people are sincere then He will reveal himself and then You will know that God did actually Inspire these Words ........ So if people cannot do that then the question here is just a mockery
No. It really isn't. I can provide you the evidence, but I can't make you think. God moves the hearts of men.
Do you think you've done a good job of that so far?
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.
