Christianity Isn't A Blind Faith
We have faith that the Bible is true. Is this a blind faith--meaning that we just blindly trust that since the Bible says it is true, it must be true? We can, but unlike any other religion's "scripture" (such as the Quran) we don't have to. The Bible proves to us that it is true using a wide variety of ways such as archeology, astronomy, non-Christian historical records, and others. One of my favorites are the prophecies in the Bible.
In Deuteronomy 18:20 the Bible sets the standard for prophecy. 100% of the prophecies must be 100% perfectly correct, or the source of those prophecies is not truly from God. In other words, only God knows the future, anyone else will make mistakes and thus not be a true prophet.
Why does God tell us about the future? There are several reasons, but one key reason is to validate His message--to prove that the message is from Him (God). This is one of the main methods we can use to discern whether a book is from God or from man.
The Bible includes about 3,000 prophecies of the future. About half of those concern the end time, which has not yet come. We can look at the remaining 1,500 and see whether they were correct prophecies. The answer--they all are 100% correct.
And Bible prophecies are not the general type of prophecy you find in horoscopes in the newspaper. They can be very specific, naming people, dates and places.
Here's a prophecy from Isaiah:
"It is I [God] who says of Cyrus, 'He is My shepherd! And he will perform all my desire.' And he declares of Jerusalem, 'She will be built,' and of the temple, 'Your foundations will be laid.'" - Isaiah 44:28
This prophecy is a part of a series of prophecies about Israel going into captivity in Babylon (which happened), returning after 70 years (which happened), Babylon being destroyed (which happened), and after which the above prophecy says a person named Cyrus will cause Jerusalem to be rebuilt and the foundations of the temple laid. This prophecy was made and recorded 140 years before Solomon's temple was destroyed by the Babylonians and 210 years before the prophecy was to come true. The prophecy is specific - naming specific names and places. It is understandable. And notice it does not say the Temple would be rebuilt, it only says the foundation would be laid--which is exactly what happened. The foundation was laid and then construction stopped. As highly specific as it is, the prophecy was 100% accurate.
How does the "scripture" of other religions stack up when compared with the prophecy of the Bible? Tabloid psychics typically get about 50% of their prophecies right. The Quran, the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Book of Mormon (and associated books) get zero right.
Let's look at the prophecies about Jesus. There are about 300 prophecies about Jesus. We have copies of these prophecies in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were hidden in caves over 100 years before Jesus was born. Thus there is no question that these prophecies were made well before the birth of Christ. Here are a few. The verse reference in parenthesis is a verse describing the fulfillment of the prophecy.
Isaiah 53:3 - He will be rejected by His own people (John 1:11)
Isaiah 53:5 - He was pierced through for our transgressions (John 20:27)
Isaiah 53:7 - He will be silent in response to His accusers (Mark 15:4,5)
Isaiah 53:12 - He will be killed with criminals (Mark 15:27,28)
Isaiah 53:9 - He will be buried in a rich man's tomb (Matthew 27:57-60)
Micah 5:2 - Will be born in Bethlehem (Luke 2:4, 5, 7)
Isaiah 7:14 - He will be born of a virgin. (Luke 1:26, 27, 30, 31)
Jeremiah 31:15 - There will be a slaughter of children. (Matthew 2:16-18)
Hosea 11:1 - He will come out of Egypt (Matthew 2:14, 15)
Psalms 78:2-4 - He will speak in parables (Matthew 13:34,35)
Zechariah 9:9 - He will have a triumphal entry into Jerusalem, riding on a donkey (Mark 11:7, 9, 11)
Psalm 35:11 - He will be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (Matthew 26:14, 15)
Psalm 22:17-18 - Soldiers will gamble for His clothing (Matthew 27:35-36)
Psalm 34:20 - When he is killed, none of his bones would be broken. (It was a common practice to break the leg bones of those being crucified so they would die quicker.) (John 19:32,33,36)
Zechariah 12:10 - His side would be pierced (John 19:34)
Taking just these 15 prophecies--for any one man to fulfill all of them is impossible, unless these prophecies come from someone who knows what will happen in the future--God.
So our faith in the truth of the Bible is not a blind faith. We know we can believe the Bible (trust the Bible) because through the prophecy it contains it proves itself to be the word of God. And this is just one way the Bible proves itself to be true.
In Deuteronomy 18:20 the Bible sets the standard for prophecy. 100% of the prophecies must be 100% perfectly correct, or the source of those prophecies is not truly from God. In other words, only God knows the future, anyone else will make mistakes and thus not be a true prophet.
Why does God tell us about the future? There are several reasons, but one key reason is to validate His message--to prove that the message is from Him (God). This is one of the main methods we can use to discern whether a book is from God or from man.
The Bible includes about 3,000 prophecies of the future. About half of those concern the end time, which has not yet come. We can look at the remaining 1,500 and see whether they were correct prophecies. The answer--they all are 100% correct.
And Bible prophecies are not the general type of prophecy you find in horoscopes in the newspaper. They can be very specific, naming people, dates and places.
Here's a prophecy from Isaiah:
"It is I [God] who says of Cyrus, 'He is My shepherd! And he will perform all my desire.' And he declares of Jerusalem, 'She will be built,' and of the temple, 'Your foundations will be laid.'" - Isaiah 44:28
This prophecy is a part of a series of prophecies about Israel going into captivity in Babylon (which happened), returning after 70 years (which happened), Babylon being destroyed (which happened), and after which the above prophecy says a person named Cyrus will cause Jerusalem to be rebuilt and the foundations of the temple laid. This prophecy was made and recorded 140 years before Solomon's temple was destroyed by the Babylonians and 210 years before the prophecy was to come true. The prophecy is specific - naming specific names and places. It is understandable. And notice it does not say the Temple would be rebuilt, it only says the foundation would be laid--which is exactly what happened. The foundation was laid and then construction stopped. As highly specific as it is, the prophecy was 100% accurate.
How does the "scripture" of other religions stack up when compared with the prophecy of the Bible? Tabloid psychics typically get about 50% of their prophecies right. The Quran, the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Book of Mormon (and associated books) get zero right.
Let's look at the prophecies about Jesus. There are about 300 prophecies about Jesus. We have copies of these prophecies in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were hidden in caves over 100 years before Jesus was born. Thus there is no question that these prophecies were made well before the birth of Christ. Here are a few. The verse reference in parenthesis is a verse describing the fulfillment of the prophecy.
Isaiah 53:3 - He will be rejected by His own people (John 1:11)
Isaiah 53:5 - He was pierced through for our transgressions (John 20:27)
Isaiah 53:7 - He will be silent in response to His accusers (Mark 15:4,5)
Isaiah 53:12 - He will be killed with criminals (Mark 15:27,28)
Isaiah 53:9 - He will be buried in a rich man's tomb (Matthew 27:57-60)
Micah 5:2 - Will be born in Bethlehem (Luke 2:4, 5, 7)
Isaiah 7:14 - He will be born of a virgin. (Luke 1:26, 27, 30, 31)
Jeremiah 31:15 - There will be a slaughter of children. (Matthew 2:16-18)
Hosea 11:1 - He will come out of Egypt (Matthew 2:14, 15)
Psalms 78:2-4 - He will speak in parables (Matthew 13:34,35)
Zechariah 9:9 - He will have a triumphal entry into Jerusalem, riding on a donkey (Mark 11:7, 9, 11)
Psalm 35:11 - He will be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (Matthew 26:14, 15)
Psalm 22:17-18 - Soldiers will gamble for His clothing (Matthew 27:35-36)
Psalm 34:20 - When he is killed, none of his bones would be broken. (It was a common practice to break the leg bones of those being crucified so they would die quicker.) (John 19:32,33,36)
Zechariah 12:10 - His side would be pierced (John 19:34)
Taking just these 15 prophecies--for any one man to fulfill all of them is impossible, unless these prophecies come from someone who knows what will happen in the future--God.
So our faith in the truth of the Bible is not a blind faith. We know we can believe the Bible (trust the Bible) because through the prophecy it contains it proves itself to be the word of God. And this is just one way the Bible proves itself to be true.
posted by BrickBalloon
Read This Post In Our: Christianity in America Blog Archive
12 Comments:
Evidentiary proof relies on an irreproachable chain of custody when it comes to the evidence itself.
In the case of the bible the chain of custody is not clear. There have been numerous occasions where edits were effected.
Also of interest is the fact that the origins of many of the older books in the bible are not known, some are thought to be folklore passed on by word of mouth.
Since they were captured in writing subsequent to the life of jesus, there is no guarantee against the insertion of retrospective prophecies, or less insidiously the correction or removal of erroneous ones.
It would be interesting to see the distribution of the provably correct prophecies against a timeline, to compare the score of those that deal with events prior to the construction of the bible with those that deal with events that have occurred since.
In essence you rely on the bible to prove to you that it is reliable. That is circular reasoning, hence my questions about faith.
You said: "In the case of the bible the chain of custody is not clear. There have been numerous occasions where edits were effected."
On the contrary, there are no ancient historical documents for which the chain of custody is so clear, and irreproachable. The New Testament was written during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses to the events described. To try to falsify what happened is similar--including similar in time frame--to those who try to deny that the holocaust took place. There are still living witnesses who can testify to the truth, and first-hand records are easily attainable. The last book of the New Testament was written about 60 years after the crucifixion of Christ, and we are now about 60 years after the holocaust. Lies about the holocaust won't fly now and neither would lies about Jesus when the New Testament was written.
As far as the accurate transmission of the New Testament, there are no ancient books for which we have so many copies from so close to the date of the original manuscripts as the New Testament. If we throw out the New Testament, we must--based on the same criteria--throw out everything we know about the ancient world. While for most works the best we have is a handful of copies made over 1000 years after the original. For the New Testament we have over 25,000 copies made within 200 years of the originals, including some fragments of books from within decades of when the original were written. This vast number of copies, and short time between the original and the copies we have, does not leave room for transmission errors or intentional changes. No reputable scholar - Christian or secular - disputes that we have an accurate copy of the original New Testament and the accuracy of what the New Testament reports is no longer in doubt.
"Also of interest is the fact that the origins of many of the older books in the bible are not known, some are thought to be folklore passed on by word of mouth."
Some may think whatever they want, as there are always some that wish to deny God.
"Since they were captured in writing subsequent to the life of Jesus, there is no guarantee against the insertion of retrospective prophecies, or less insidiously the correction or removal of erroneous ones."
There is no disagreement among reputable secular and Christian scholars that the Bible we have now is 99.8% a match to the original. And that those words that are in question have nothing to do with doctrine or authenticity. Let's take the 15 prophecies about Jesus I provided. They were found in the 1950's and had been buried in a cave since more than 100 years before Jesus was born. There is no way a retrospective prophecy could be added. Yet they accurately predict the coming of, life and death of Jesus Christ. And there are many more.
In anticipation of your objection, I've provided what you say you want. There are scientific ways to date the original date books of the Old Testament were written based on the style and form of writing, the content, and other factors. I have to admit I've read about how this is done, but I'm not an expert and must leave that to others (I can recommend some books, if you wish). But, I'm intentionally avoiding Old Testament prophecies about events recorded in the Old Testament. I'm looking at prophecies about Jesus that were sealed in a cave over 100 years before Jesus was born.
How many prophecies from the Dead Sea Scrolls, about Jesus, would you like? The 15 I've provided meet all your criteria and represent an astronomically high probability that they all could be true randomly. Probability science says that it is impossible for all of these prophecies to be fulfilled based on random chance. They also represent things which scholars--including the vast majority of secular scholars--no longer question as happening. Again I can recommend books in this area that describe the techniques used to determine the accuracy of historical information.
15 successes out of 15 trials is improbable, but by no means impossible. Particularly when the outcome of those trials can be controlled by manipulation of the texts to match events that had already occurred.
You said: "They were found in the 1950's and had been buried in a cave since more than 100 years before Jesus was born. There is no way a retrospective prophecy could be added."
I can think of a half dozen ways in which they could have been modified and I'm not even trying. To suggest otherwise indicates a strong belief in their authenticity. The point being that you take it as given that they were not modified.
My question could probably do with refinement: Is your faith not a component of what makes you accept the truth of the bible?
MTA/Davis
Thanks for deleting my post.
Are you a communist too?
I feel so guilty. You are right, I am a post modern liberal. Was that supposed to be an insult? Hey, and thanks for spelling "Christian" correctly. Fantastic! The new word is "Liberal". There will be a test later. It helps me to use flashcards when studying. This could work for you. It's just an idea.
By the way, Christian fanatics do think they are the center of the universe. You prove it every time you post. But, thanks for the Christian fanatical "science" response to a metaphorical statement.
It is great to hear that you, too, are against oppression. Now you can move past the whole gay rights issue. It is about time you agreed with me and decided it is a waste of your time to argue about this topic. Now, we can spend more time on, say, the Iraq war. Now, that is a terrible thing. All those people dying. Terrible.
Why would I send you a check? So, you can go recruit people to the dark side? You and I both know I don't want any part of that.
Can I just say how much I love the argument that Christians are a persecuted people. Wonderful. You sound like a baby. Technowalker should change your diaper. Would you like some cheese with your whine?
When were you persecuted? Was it when they let those gay people marry? Gosh, people acting on their own! And against God's will! Or was it when they took the ten commandments out of the courtroom. Or.. was it when that guy in Sacramento fought against the Pledge of Allegiance? I know. Christian fanatics were being persecuted when they were abusing kids for all those years. Was that it?
I love your example. Try to wear a tie with a cross on it at work. Umm.. ok. But, I have to admit, most of the time I just walk around naked. I don't think my Christian fanatical boss would mind if I wore a cross on my flip-flops. I know what your next question is. What about my other job I had. Would people care there? After all, it was a much larger office. My former co-workers would not have cared at all. Some of them even asked me for donations for the events they were involved with. I really do not think it would be a problem. But, what about high school? Surely, wearing a cross in that environment would be a problem. Umm.. I wore a Christian metal. Nobody cared. Now, what about college? Being entrenched in that post modern liberal Mecca must have been difficult. It wasn't on my public school campus. And several of my friends did not have a problem displaying their Christian identities.
It seems to me that this fear that you talk about is drummed up in your own paranoid churches. Everyday the Church widens the gap between a moderate center and their own reactionary fanatical beliefs. The moderate center is full of people that want to believe in something. But, they do not want to be part of a fanatical organization that hurts people. Just to hit on your favorite topic one more time, gay rights continues to be an issue. I had the opportunity to hear some young republicans and democrats speak last week. The one topic they agreed on was gay rights. Gay marriage is around the corner. I hope that you can learn to accept this group.
As for your bonus comment regarding laws and judges. It saddens me that you have such a strong reaction to this. The law means nothing to "radical" judges? Hardly, the San Francisco judge came to his decision on his own. He interprets the law the way he sees it. He made a ruling based on the law. I am sorry if you disagree. But, to suggest that this judge has no respect for the law is ridiculous.
Finally, your rant on the will of the people. Majority rules with minority rights. Ever heard of that one? Civil Rights. Did you hear about that? As far as San Francisco is concerned, that memorable Valentines Day weekend was by/for/of the people.
All comments that include "four letter words" will be deleted as soon as they found. Keep your language clean and your comments will not be deleted.
By the way, this rule for our blog is not open for discussion.
I find it interesting that you say, and say it three times, that you know of ways to do something that the world's best scholars agree can't be done. How do you propose the contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls might be changed? Or that the New Testament writing be "cooked" to support the prophecies about Jesus?
There is no academic disagreement concerning their age. There is no academic disagreement that they were sealed in clay jars in caves near the Dead Sea--and had not been touched since they were placed in the caves over 2000 years ago.
Are you claiming someone changed them after they were found? How do you erase paragraphs of text, written in 2000 year old ink on fragile scrolls? How do you then write in the new text in a way that can not be detected. It can't be done.
As far as 15 out of 15 being "improbable" or impossible, it depends on what's involved. If this were flipping a coin, yet it could happen. But this is not flipping a coin in which there are only two possible outcomes. For example, Jesus' birth place. There are hundreds on towns in Israel he could have been born in--with a town in Galilee or the major population center Jerusalem being the most probable. Bethlehem was a tiny, nowhere village. Just the odds against him being born in Bethlehem are huge.
And how about the prophecy that he will come out of Egypt? First let's ask, why did Mary and Joseph take Jesus to Egypt? To escape the slaughter of children ordered by Herod. They not only had to get out of Bethlehem, they had to get out of Israel--and they had to do it quickly--the same night they received the news about what Herod planned. But Mary and Joseph were not well off, how did they pay for their escape to Egypt? They had just been given expensive gift by the three "magicians" (wise men) from the east. God provided what they needed.
Joseph and Mary could have fled to any of a number of other places. For example, why not head east with the "wise men"? But, as they made their hasty departure they chose Egypt. Again this is not a flip of a coin--there are a multitude of possibilities. But again the prophecy was exactly right.
You may protest, but mathematicians have calculated the probability of just eight of the prophecies about Jesus coming true--and concluded that the probability was so low that the only conclusion is that it was impossible. They are to be true prophecies.
Or maybe you are proposing that the content of the New Testament was changed to match the prophecies. Again you would be fighting against the conclusions of the world's best scholars. Even secular scholars, historians and archeologists no longer dispute the authenticity and accuracy of the Biblical record.
Let's take just one book, the book of Luke for example. It includes the most details about Jesus' early life. Luke personally knew the apostles, who lived with and listened to Jesus for three years. He knew Mary mother of Jesus, and James and Jude (Jesus' brothers). He also most likely had the opportunity to talk with (interview) Jesus' other brothers and sisters, as well as many others who were close to Jesus. Luke has proven himself to be a very accurate and detailed historian. A lot of archeological and documentary evidence related to the contents of the book of Luke has been unearthed--and not once has any of the details included in the book of Luke been shown to be wrong. What you read in the newspaper today does not even come close in accuracy to the proven accuracy of Luke.
Is my faith not a component of what makes me accept the truth of the bible? -- Not originally. The Bible first had to prove itself to be trustworthy before I started trusting it. I was lead to Christ through the proof of the Bible's trustworthiness. I studied the scientific, historical, archeological, and psychological evidence for and against the Bible. I found little hard evidence against it and overwhelming evidence for it's accuracy--but still I did not believe.
I also studied the evidence for the birth, life, death and resurrection of Christ, as well as studying the theories in opposition. The evidence is overwhelming that the person Jesus Christ lived 2000 years ago. No one disputes this. The evidence is overwhelming that Jesus Christ was a prophet and great teacher. No one disputes this. The evidence shows that Jesus taught that he was God. Although some people choose to dispute parts of the Bible, it's interesting to note that no one disputes the record of Jesus' teaching that he is God. The evidence shows that Jesus was killed by the Romans. That is not disputed. And the evidence shows that Jesus rose from the dead. Study it yourself. The evidence is so strong that there is no doubt that it happened.
I put all this evidence about Jesus together and came to a conclusion. Jesus is God, the creator of the universe, and if God is trying to tell me something I had better pay attention. That's when I started to believe the Bible and I started paying attention to God's word.
I don't know whether all the world's greatest scholars think forgery or altering is impossible, but then again I have not spoken to all of them so I guess I shouldn't make assumptions.
However vehemently you may feel that it did not occur, the possibility remains. I simply suggest that your faith is a part of what makes you believe so strongly that it did not. You obviously don't think so.
On another note I'm taken aback at your contention that no-one disputes the truth of christianity. Do you wish to qualify that?
On yet another more related note, did you come across any of the alternative gospels in your studies? I am sure you are well aware of the number of christian texts not included in the bible.
The common view of this is that the men who put together the bible constructed a religious text that best suited their goals. Is this not at odds with the notion of divinely inspired communication?
"And the evidence shows that Jesus rose from the dead. Study it yourself. The evidence is so strong that there is no doubt that it happened."
I read a book about George Washington. Did you know that he was afraid to be buried alive because he thought that happened to Jesus? (I think it was, "To Begin the World Anew : The Genius and Ambiguities of the American Founders" by Bernard Bailyn)
Anonymous:
"On another note I'm taken aback at your contention that no-one disputes the truth of Christianity. Do you wish to qualify that?"
I did not say that. I said that respected scholars dispute certain facts related to the Bible, such that the fact that a person named Jesus actually lived and was crucified. Where there is a difference is in the conclusions drawn from the facts. (And yes, there are people who dispute that Jesus even existed--but you can find someone who supports any view you want. The question becomes, do those "someones" have a track record that demonstrates their authority? No, they don't.)
"On yet another more related note, did you come across any of the alternative gospels in your studies? I am sure you are well aware of the number of Christian texts not included in the bible."
I'm familiar with many of the alternative "gospels". Most were written by Gnostics who denied the deity of Christ. However, just because a non-Christian cult wrote some books about Jesus and called them gospels, that does not make them Christian or gospels.
In the first and second centuries writing books and calling them Christian gospels was common. Numerous people wanted to take advantage of Christ's reputation to push their own agenda, or even to just make some money. For example, Paul had a major problem with others writing "letters" and signing his name to them. To authenticate his letters Paul signed each copy he sent out with his own hand.
While some of these writings do have historical information that is of use, these writings are of no consequence as far as Christian beliefs and doctrine.
"The common view of this is that the men who put together the bible constructed a religious text that best suited their goals. Is this not at odds with the notion of divinely inspired communication?"
I don't agree that the "common view" is that the Bible was put together by men to suit their own goals. That is the view of some who have the agenda of separating God's word from His people, but it is not the common view. So the assumption behind your question is not correct.
Second, read the Bible. Study the history of the first century. The New Testament did not benefit those who wrote it. If they were looking for personal benefit they were writing the wrong things. What they wrote got them martyred--in some very horrible ways (such as getting sawed in half the long way). Those who benefited from their writings were those who wrote in opposition to Jesus. I don't think either of us has the courage of Paul who was regularly beaten, whipped, stoned and physically abused. He wasn't benefiting himself in any way from what he wrote. Can you think of anybody who took the abuse Paul did, and did it in order to promote a lie? Or what about the brother of Jesus, James. If anyone knew there were lies being written, it would be him. But he was the de-facto leader of the Jerusalem church. He was martyred. Do you know of anyone who would die for a lie?
Christian oppression?
Are you allowed to talk about anything you'd like in your business or home, whenever you'd like? I'm not. It's illegal for me to express an opinion about political candidates during an election, because of my position at Mission to America.
How about the university professor fired for having his students read "In His Steps" - a novel that has a Christian theme. On the other hand my son's teachers (also college) "force" him to read extreme liberal books that are not related to the class subject. When a teacher was questioned as to why certain books were required reading, her response was, "Because I'm the teacher and I can do that." She didn't even try to defend that they were related in any way to the class. She was pushing her philosophy and culture onto the students. Shouldn't she be fired for pushing her religion of atheism onto her students?
How about the label in biology books in Georgia? The judge ruled that what the label said was true and factual, but since a Christian group initiated the request to add the label, the label must be removed. So, even when speaking scientific truth (nothing from the Bible) Christians must be muzzled? We'd rather have false "science" in our children's textbooks than to have scientific truth come from a Christian.
How about gay pride parades in which virtually nude people engage in simulated sex acts parade down the street. Yet, in another parade, a Christian float is banned from the parade because… it's Christian.
Teachers have been fired for wearing a jewelry with a cross, and yes a tie with a cross, yet the last time I visited our high school the teachers were wearing buttons and pins supporting all types of political causes and cultural views (except Christianity).
Christians in America don't face the life threatening persecution of China, or the persecution in Muslim countries. It's more like the subtle oppression of unspoken racism.
Re: Judge Kramer
I thought the one man one woman marriage law in California passed by more than 61%.
My memory may be faulty, but I thought the California Supreme Court already ruled that homosexual marriage was not legal in California. Which is the higher court for interpreting, a County Court or the State Supreme Court?
I may agree with you that maybe Judge Kramer interprets the law the way he sees it--or maybe it's the way it needs to be interpreted to get reelected in San Francisco.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home