A Matter of Truth
An anonymous person responded to my ealier post on the DaVinci Code, "Bashing Christ In Fact and Fiction." Among the many questions raised in his response was the following:
"So what (if) the DaVinci Code is a book of fiction, what makes you so sure that the bible is not a book of fiction?"
Dan Brown himself claims that his book is fiction. The Bible never makes a claim to being a work of fiction. There are thousands of manuscripts of the Bible, more than any ancient book. The apostles and prophets who wrote the scriptures are eyewitnesses to the truths written in Scripture. Finally, Jesus Christ himself testifies to the veracity and accuracy of Scripture, up to its punctuation marks.
Dan Brown claims his work is fiction and you grant him a status of "Truthful". The Bible claims to be truthful and you reduce its status to that of "Fiction". You are being thoroughly dishonest, and I doubt that you are really seeking the truth.
Furthermore, the burden of proof lies with you to prove that the Bible is fiction. I don't have to prove that the Bible is not fiction just because you think that The DaVinci Code is somewhow equivalent to the Bible.
"So what (if) the DaVinci Code is a book of fiction, what makes you so sure that the bible is not a book of fiction?"
Dan Brown himself claims that his book is fiction. The Bible never makes a claim to being a work of fiction. There are thousands of manuscripts of the Bible, more than any ancient book. The apostles and prophets who wrote the scriptures are eyewitnesses to the truths written in Scripture. Finally, Jesus Christ himself testifies to the veracity and accuracy of Scripture, up to its punctuation marks.
Dan Brown claims his work is fiction and you grant him a status of "Truthful". The Bible claims to be truthful and you reduce its status to that of "Fiction". You are being thoroughly dishonest, and I doubt that you are really seeking the truth.
Furthermore, the burden of proof lies with you to prove that the Bible is fiction. I don't have to prove that the Bible is not fiction just because you think that The DaVinci Code is somewhow equivalent to the Bible.
posted at 12:35 PM PermaLink
5 Comments:
"Finally, Jesus Christ himself testifies to the veracity and accuracy of Scripture, up to its punctuation marks."
??? The only scripture that existed that Christ could have verified was the OT, a text written in Hebrew, which not only didn't have our modern punctuation (or any punctuation), but had no vowels. Your statement is not based in fact.
You are right in your observation that Christ could only comment on the Old Testament. In Matthew 5:18, Jesus says, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (KJV).
What I loosely described as "punctuation marks" are referred to as the "jot and tittle" of the Hebrew alphabet which were small strokes or accents which could change the meaning of words.
Thus Jesus affirmed the accuracy of the Scriptures right down to the strokes or accents.
As for the New Testament, the early Church refers to them thus:
"...Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures." (2Peter 3:15-16)
The letters Paul were given the status of Sacred Scripture. So were the Gospels and the other Epistles.
I think you're doing some pretty great work here, culture warrior. Keep it up, and update often. The header on this forum really embodies what I see as the consequences of this battle being waged across the world on traditional-Christian values (be it from Islamofascists abroad, or militant secular-progressive politicians here at home).
God Bless you.
I find any argument for the bible as truth rather difficult to accept. You mentioned before of the high number of manuscripts, through which the bible is transmitted to us. The problem is that not all of these manuscripts are in agreement and the critical editions of the bible that one reads today are editions prepared by scholars -- in essence an "interpretation" of the manuscript tradition. An interpretation is not truth, but rather a subjective view of the truth.
"I find any argument for the bible as truth rather difficult to accept."
Notice the thoroughly unbiased and open-minded statement from the anonymous post above. This is typical of most relativistic thinkers.
Post a Comment
<< Home