God preserving His Bible

[sawdust]

Thank you for your responses. I have a couple of comments.

Many of you mentioned free will. I'm glad he gave us free will, we can either join him or reject him- but it's more complicated than that. Because there is more than just one religion to agree with or reject, it's more than just "do you trust God or not?" Instead it's "which Holy Book do you think God wants you to follow?"

Is "rejecting" God the same thing as loving God and thinking you are serving God but then find out that even though you were earnestly trying to follow God and understand his teachings, you were mislead by the wrong book that you thought he authored?

And if God really is trying to teach a lesson, does he give people who try to follow him but get confused a second chance? It's not like all Muslims are war-like and nasty. I mean, if a nice, loving, kind Muslim man who loves and respects Jesus as his prophet dies, what do you think God does with him? The poor fellow tried to follow God by the way he thought was right. Does God go "Oh well, you tried but you screwed up. Into hell..."

I think it only appears complicated to us because we cannot see and know all that goes on in a person's life, let alone within their heart.

The Lord wants people to be saved. He doesn't want them to be led away by error. God judges people based upon what a person receives. If God did not reveal Himself no-one would ever know who or what He is like. If you read Romans 1 you will realise that no-one will be without excuse because whatever a person needs they are given it.

In your case scenario above? The Lord will not be saying "you tried but screwed up". Instead He will point out all the times the man had been given the truth and rejected it.

Absolutely no-one will end up in hell (a.k.a. lake of fire) because they "screwed up". Salvation is a gift from God and God doesn't have "screw ups".

Does a criminal belong in jail? If we could judge knowing all the facts and with absolute righteousness (as God can) would we put those who have committed no crime in jail? So it will be at the end of time. Only those who have chosen the darkness because they delight in the darkness will end up in eternal fire.

Today your Muslim man (above) may be a Muslim but tomorrow??? As long as a man takes breath the Lord works to draw him/her to salvation.

Peace

 

[sawdust]

That's exactly my point- to be religious you both have to first believe if God exists, and then choose from the many religions which one is correct.

I also believe that God judges on a person-by-person basis, and that his grace covers all people who were good and loving in life. However, many Christians believe that only those who believe that Jesus is their Lord and Savior are saved, and that all others, despite being "good" are not able to be saved.

Christ did not come to give us religion, He came to give us life.

I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. Jn.10:10b

The Pharisees already had religion.

What every one of us lacks is spiritual life. That is the way we are born. Without a spiritual life we cannot know God. This is why Christ said "you must be born again (or from above)". (Jn3:3)

Doing "good" has nothing to do with being saved from death. Doing "good" doesn't come into consideration until after we are saved. Post salvation life is about overcoming evil, that is why doing good doesn't come into it until then.

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Rm.12:21

Before we can even know what "good" is, (God alone is good) we must have the life we lacked, the life for which Christ died to give us.

peace

 

[sawdust]

Whats interesting is that it appears that that both the law and the lake of fire were made for the same, ever notice that?

I'm afraid I'm not following.
Can you elaborate a little more please.

peace

 

[Yekcidmij]

Let me ask you this. What do you think happens to good people of other religions. Do you think God allows his grace to cover their sins even though they didn't believe Jesus was God?

The Bible is clear on this. Believe on the One God sent.

Example: A kind, loving muslim man. He grows up studying the Quran and trying to do what God wants. He raises a good family, teachings his kids to be moral and to always do the right thing, etc. He is in most ways what we would call "good". Do you think he goes to hell when he dies? He loved and respected Jesus as a prophet, but was always taught that he was only a prophet, not God.

For christians, we believe that all men have fallen and are sinful by nature. "Good" is a relative term here. He may be "good" compared to me, but nobody is "good" according to God. God is the perfection of Holiness and Justice; every man is in sinful rebellion against God. The only way out of His judgement is to repent of our sins and know and trust that our sins were taken on by Christ on the cross. According to christians, .this is the only way out of our predicament.

As for believing Jesus was God, we must believe this. First, there is no way a man with a sin nature could become our sacrifice for all of our sins. Second, Christ claimed to be God and proved His claim by the resurrection. Jesus' instructions were clear, He is God, He came and was punished in our place, we must have faith in Him for the forgiveness of our sins. This goes for everyone including those that are "good".

Another example: Gandhi. He was raised as a hindu. He studied the Bible, and said that he considered Jesus one of his greatest teachers. He lived in a way that Jesus clearly would have approved of, but he didn't believe Jesus was God. Gandhi taught non-violent protests, he starved himself for his people. Do you think God allowed him to go to hell because of what he was taught?

This is a flawed question. Do you think God allowed him to go to heaven while having a sinful nature?

 

[Yekcidmij]

That's exactly my point- to be religious you both have to first believe if God exists, and then choose from the many religions which one is correct.

I also believe that God judges on a person-by-person basis, and that his grace covers all people who were good and loving in life. However, many Christians believe that only those who believe that Jesus is their Lord and Savior are saved, and that all others, despite being "good" are not able to be saved.

As I mentioned in the above post, "good" and "loving" are relative terms. When compared to someone who is holy, perfect, all-good, and all-love, our goodness is nothing; it's "filthy rags".

 

[Hentenza]

Let me ask you this. What do you think happens to good people of other religions. Do you think God allows his grace to cover their sins even though they didn't believe Jesus was God?

Example: A kind, loving muslim man. He grows up studying the Quran and trying to do what God wants. He raises a good family, teachings his kids to be moral and to always do the right thing, etc. He is in most ways what we would call "good". Do you think he goes to hell when he dies? He loved and respected Jesus as a prophet, but was always taught that he was only a prophet, not God.

Another example: Gandhi. He was raised as a hindu. He studied the Bible, and said that he considered Jesus one of his greatest teachers. He lived in a way that Jesus clearly would have approved of, but he didn't believe Jesus was God. Gandhi taught non-violent protests, he starved himself for his people. Do you think God allowed him to go to hell because of what he was taught?

Romans 2:6-16
6God "will give to each person according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism. 12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.



God is a just God and will judge men by what is in their heart. We cannot judge what we see because we have no access to the truth in an individual's heart. An individual's actions can seem "good" to us but not be "good" in God's eyes.




Paul gives us this revelation in Romans 3:9-10
9What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. 10As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;



Even those who appear "good" are really not because all will sin. So, God will judge everyone according to what is written in their hearts.

 

[R3quiem]

As I mentioned in the above post, "good" and "loving" are relative terms. When compared to someone who is holy, perfect, all-good, and all-love, our goodness is nothing; it's "filthy rags".

That's exactly why I put the word good in quotation marks- because I'm using it as a relative word. I'm not comparing them to God, I'm comparing them to our standard of good, the standard of Christians.

 

[tulc]

Bear in mind that Islam spread by "convert or the sword" tactics and still does. If there is any religion imposed on any population it is Islam. (emph. added)

The eternal fire is the "jailhouse" for evil eternally.

uhmmmm anyone else see any irony here?
tulc(just wondering)

 

[R3quiem]

uhmmmm anyone else see any irony here?
tulc(just wondering)

Yeah, I see the irony.

 

[R3quiem]

This thread seems to have gone off topic a bit; it's mostly my fault though.

I'd still like to hear some opinions as to God preserving the Bible. If he watches over the Bible and makes sure that it stays accurate, why does he allow other scriptures to pop up that seem so convincing to many people that it really is from him?

 

[Yekcidmij]

This thread seems to have gone off topic a bit; it's mostly my fault though.

I'd still like to hear some opinions as to God preserving the Bible. If he watches over the Bible and makes sure that it stays accurate, why does he allow other scriptures to pop up that seem so convincing to many people that it really is from him?

Because he allows humans to make choices even if those choices are wrong.

 

[R3quiem]

Because he allows humans to make choices even if those choices are wrong.

Fair viewpoint. I just wonder why he would allow for such confusion though. It can be argued that the bible is the obvious choice for which holy book is correct, but many people of other religions would argue that their holy book is more obviously God's Word.

 

[Nachtjager]

Once again I stick my toes into the water to get them sliced off, but here goes. I believe with fairly recent textual discoveries, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Textus Sinaiticus, and even the Textus Vatinicus, I think a major reevaluation of the modern canon and English interpretation is in order, not to mention a serious analytical look at the oldest existent texts to reestablish what was intended to be God's word.

What we have today, if you look into its history at all, is a Bible that certainly has problems and it can hardly be considered "preserved." Let us not forget, most western Bibles today are based on the hasty assembly of what became the Textus Receptus by good old humanist Erasmus back in the 1500s. Are we really to trust something as important as eternal salvation and the understanding of God's will to a self-professed humanist from the 16th century? I like how Young's points out that the King James Bible uses forty-nine different words of the Greek and Hebrew that all become "destroy" in the KJV. How can forty-nine different words all mean the same thing? And that's just one example, there are literally hundreds of others.

Perhaps we are finding these ancient manuscripts as of late because God WANTS His will to be corrected - has anyone aside from me thought of that? Jesus warned us against the "lying pens of scribes" - have we been deceived in some respects for these many centuries? And is sticking our head in the sand and saying it's all true "just because" and ignoring evidence to the contrary really what our Heavenly Father would desire?

Okay, let's hear some insight on this, that's all I've got for now. Take care and God bless!

 

[R3quiem]

Once again I stick my toes into the water to get them sliced off, but here goes. I believe with fairly recent textual discoveries, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Textus Sinaiticus, and even the Textus Vatinicus, I think a major reevaluation of the modern canon and English interpretation is in order, not to mention a serious analytical look at the oldest existent texts to reestablish what was intended to be God's word.

What we have today, if you look into its history at all, is a Bible that certainly has problems and it can hardly be considered "preserved." Let us not forget, most western Bibles today are based on the hasty assembly of what became the Textus Receptus by good old humanist Erasmus back in the 1500s. Are we really to trust something as important as eternal salvation and the understanding of God's will to a self-professed humanist from the 16th century? I like how Young's points out that the King James Bible uses forty-nine different words of the Greek and Hebrew that all become "destroy" in the KJV. How can forty-nine different words all mean the same thing? And that's just one example, there are literally hundreds of others.

Perhaps we are finding these ancient manuscripts as of late because God WANTS His will to be corrected - has anyone aside from me thought of that? Jesus warned us against the "lying pens of scribes" - have we been deceived in some respects for these many centuries? And is sticking our head in the sand and saying it's all true "just because" and ignoring evidence to the contrary really what our Heavenly Father would desire?

Okay, let's hear some insight on this, that's all I've got for now. Take care and God bless!

I agree with that.

I don't believe that the bible has necessarily been preserved accurately. That's one of the reasons I started the thread. The books of the New Testament were chosen among many books that could have been included. Maybe the argument could be used to say that God influenced them to pick the correct books, but that would be tampering with free will a bit. If he doesn't mind influencing us, then he could have just as easily influenced people to NOT believe the Quran to be true, or not to have been written at all.

 

[tulc]

Let us not forget, most western Bibles today are based on the hasty assembly of what became the Textus Receptus by good old humanist Erasmus back in the 1500s. Are we really to trust something as important as eternal salvation and the understanding of God's will to a self-professed humanist from the 16th century?

uhmmm because it isn't Erasmus we trust but God?
tulc(just a thought)

 

[sunlover1]

This thread seems to have gone off topic a bit; it's mostly my fault though.

I'd still like to hear some opinions as to God preserving the Bible. If he watches over the Bible and makes sure that it stays accurate, why does he allow other scriptures to pop up that seem so convincing to many people that it really is from him?

I think I misunderstood your question first time I posted.
Sorry.

God's word is different than any other writings.
I believe that even though He preserved His, that
we are still warned that false gospels would crop
up and so need to be watchful.

We have the Spirit of God in us too, so we should
be able to know the difference.

The world is blind to spiritual things because
spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

That's all I got for now.
Good question,
brings up many more too.

sunlover

 

[sunlover1]

Once again I stick my toes into the water to get them sliced off, but here goes. I believe with fairly recent textual discoveries, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Textus Sinaiticus, and even the Textus Vatinicus, I think a major reevaluation of the modern canon and English interpretation is in order, not to mention a serious analytical look at the oldest existent texts to reestablish what was intended to be God's word.

What we have today, if you look into its history at all, is a Bible that certainly has problems and it can hardly be considered "preserved." Let us not forget, most western Bibles today are based on the hasty assembly of what became the Textus Receptus by good old humanist Erasmus back in the 1500s. Are we really to trust something as important as eternal salvation and the understanding of God's will to a self-professed humanist from the 16th century? I like how Young's points out that the King James Bible uses forty-nine different words of the Greek and Hebrew that all become "destroy" in the KJV. How can forty-nine different words all mean the same thing? And that's just one example, there are literally hundreds of others.

Perhaps we are finding these ancient manuscripts as of late because God WANTS His will to be corrected - has anyone aside from me thought of that? Jesus warned us against the "lying pens of scribes" - have we been deceived in some respects for these many centuries? And is sticking our head in the sand and saying it's all true "just because" and ignoring evidence to the contrary really what our Heavenly Father would desire?

Okay, let's hear some insight on this, that's all I've got for now. Take care and God bless!

No, I wont stick my head in the sand.
I agree with you 100%.
Although God "preserved" His Scriptures, I don't
believe they are NECESSARILY what we think them
to be.
EO has one set.
CC has one set.
Prot. has one set.

Which is correct and are any without little
mistakes?
We have to look at the facts (some you mentioned)
not just take it on blind faith.

We EACH are responsible individually to study
and show ourselves approved.

GREAT point Nach!

sunlover

 

[R3quiem]

I think I misunderstood your question first time I posted.
Sorry.

God's word is different than any other writings.
I believe that even though He preserved His, that
we are still warned that false gospels would crop
up and so need to be watchful.

We have the Spirit of God in us too, so we should
be able to know the difference.

The world is blind to spiritual things because
spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

That's all I got for now.
Good question,
brings up many more too.

sunlover

Fair viewpoint.

I must ask something though. If the Spirit of God allows us to make correct choices, and we need to accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior to receive the grace of the Spirit of God, doesn't that present an insurmountable problem for non-Christians?

If you need to be Christian to receive the Spirit, and you need the Spirit's help to become a Christian...then...yeah. As I heard someone else in another post say, that's like needing to press a button on the other side of a bridge in order to be able to cross it.

 

[E.C.]

God has preserved the Scriptures. Its just the translations that are a little skewed.

 

[R3quiem]

God has preserved the Scriptures. Its just the translations that are a little skewed.

Isn't ensuring that the translations are correct an important aspect in preserving the scripture?