Empty Talk, Nah, Evidence
After a while, I get tired of people who just talk. I do that, and I get tired of myself. What am I driving at? What's my point? What exactly is it that I'm trying so wordily to show the other?
I'm never satisfied with my posts. Although I can get a lot said, or explained, or thought out, I always leave out stuff. I know it isn't realistic to try and cover everything on a given subject, it just bugs me to think that maybe the wrong meaning is being derived from the post because of my incompetence. (which is complete)
That said, my science books and studies and observations have been dutifully filling my brain with information to search out the truth of. And having found some, I wanted to post some good, real-life evidence for what I'm always talking about in Barbarians Den. Christianity. Or rather, in this particular post, a little evidence for the accuracy of the bible; one central basis of my belief.
Also, I greatly prefer real talk to professional gibberish, and part of that means I don't do good with "references", so please forgive a general absence of them. Thanks :-)
To start, historical documents, predominately books I would suppose, are judged by three or four...judgments to gauge their accuracy. Three or four, because you can combine some, or break them up. I'm not going to write about them in any particular order. As an example book, I'll use the bible. (obviously because I'm providing evidence for its truthfulness)
The first is archeological. Does the bible contradict what we know exists from observation, and other supported, accurate books? No, it doesn't. The bible has proven over and over to be accurate concerning landmarks, countries, cities, and the like. In fact, the bible is so accurate it is used to test other books.
Second, obviously any book that contradicts itself internally is unreliable. Documents are tested over whether or not they are internally constant. The bible does not contradict itself. Yeah, books have been written about biblical contradiction, all I say is, go back to the Hebrew word roots, look at the context, search it out, there just isn't contradiction.
Are today's copies true to the original? If a book has changed more than spelling and the like, has changed content over time, how can it be reliable?
To put it frankly, the bible passes this test, just like the others, better than any other documents.
Compared to other historical texts referred to as reliable, the bible is even better. It has more copies than the others, and they remain constant, even over time.
I hate to cut this short. I'll continue in later posts, with different subjects though. I guess I'm just kind of tired of just talking about what I believe. I don't want empty talk, that doesn't ever offer any evidence.
That's all for tonight. And again, there's so much that's left out....
I'm never satisfied with my posts. Although I can get a lot said, or explained, or thought out, I always leave out stuff. I know it isn't realistic to try and cover everything on a given subject, it just bugs me to think that maybe the wrong meaning is being derived from the post because of my incompetence. (which is complete)
That said, my science books and studies and observations have been dutifully filling my brain with information to search out the truth of. And having found some, I wanted to post some good, real-life evidence for what I'm always talking about in Barbarians Den. Christianity. Or rather, in this particular post, a little evidence for the accuracy of the bible; one central basis of my belief.
Also, I greatly prefer real talk to professional gibberish, and part of that means I don't do good with "references", so please forgive a general absence of them. Thanks :-)
To start, historical documents, predominately books I would suppose, are judged by three or four...judgments to gauge their accuracy. Three or four, because you can combine some, or break them up. I'm not going to write about them in any particular order. As an example book, I'll use the bible. (obviously because I'm providing evidence for its truthfulness)
The first is archeological. Does the bible contradict what we know exists from observation, and other supported, accurate books? No, it doesn't. The bible has proven over and over to be accurate concerning landmarks, countries, cities, and the like. In fact, the bible is so accurate it is used to test other books.
Second, obviously any book that contradicts itself internally is unreliable. Documents are tested over whether or not they are internally constant. The bible does not contradict itself. Yeah, books have been written about biblical contradiction, all I say is, go back to the Hebrew word roots, look at the context, search it out, there just isn't contradiction.
Are today's copies true to the original? If a book has changed more than spelling and the like, has changed content over time, how can it be reliable?
To put it frankly, the bible passes this test, just like the others, better than any other documents.
Compared to other historical texts referred to as reliable, the bible is even better. It has more copies than the others, and they remain constant, even over time.
I hate to cut this short. I'll continue in later posts, with different subjects though. I guess I'm just kind of tired of just talking about what I believe. I don't want empty talk, that doesn't ever offer any evidence.
That's all for tonight. And again, there's so much that's left out....
Comments
Post a Comment