Here you go with the trolling tactics again, "whole Bible", "Bible" what's the difference....none. Sorry you can't find what you want to destroy christians, which you hate so much. I'll pray for you. And this is the last I'll say to you on this subject because you are grasping at straws.Keith, you know nothing of me, I am a true christian. You on the other hand are trying to create something out of nothing. If I believe something is true, yes that means literally, I don't have to use the word. If I refer to the Bible, yes that means the WHOLE Bible. You sir are trying your best to play semantics. You can not argue or dispute what I answered to your question about Thou shalt not kill and the death penalty. That is an entirely different question than your first, yet you try to tie the two together. And I answered both of your questions. Yes I believe the WHOLE Bible is LITERALLY TRUE. Do I disagree with the de

You said "Yes I do believe the Bible is literally true." Since then, you seem to be leaving out the word "literally".

You even attempt to change my question from "Do you believe the "whole Bible" is literally true?" to your version ---- "You asked if I believed the bible was true"

If you have to lie about the Bible, it does not show great faith on your part in its message.

I see the debate has devolved a bit. Mary I want to respond to your statement that the Dead Sea scrolls are proof of the accuracy of the Bible. The scrolls just prove that people recorded things well over a certain period of time. My point is what is the origin. Who first wrote it down, not how it was transcribed, etc after the fact. I really do not want to debate this further because of the obvious. One cannot debate a belief when that belief requires nothing more than an unswerving unquestioning position to old writings. Today I read about another scroll that now questions the blood at the last supper as being for Israel not for the cleansing of sinners. Everything seems debatable in religion. Flat earthers called round earthers heretics and excommunicated them. Until the flat earthers were proven wrong. And religion has been wrong many times about many things. But again beliefs dismiss these

you are so intolerant of christians. You asked if I believed the bible was true, yes it is. You asked if I don't believe in the death penalty because of the commandment Thou shalt not kill. Yes the original word can be translated as kill or murder, so whomever made the copy chose one over the other, same word, same meaning. I proved to you through the Bible that the death penalty is approved by God. You can not dispute it, so you try to make an argument about the fact that the word can be translated or mean either kill or murder. Just like almost every word in the english language can be translated or mean more than one thing. Stop being a hateful troll.

First off Ms. Speckhart, the same freedoms guaranteed this gentleman is given to you to get up on yours. A pagan, atheist, muslim, etc., has the same right/freedom to do as this man was doing. I commend this gentleman for his boldness.
There are many who say to Christians when we don't like what is on T.V.,...just turn the channel. If you don't want to hear this ... just walk on to another part of the Boardwalk. Life is about choices, isn't it?
Anyways what bothered you the most? Someone actually dared to bring the church out of the four brick walls to the people? Was he really too far from the truth? Do you really think you are not a sinner and your perfect? Are any of us perfect? Or do we just not like to hear that we all lie? or think adulterous thoughts? or that we commit murder (which hating someone, by what it says in the good book is really the same as murder)? How many of us lie to our own selves? By the way

You were the one who chose to explain the Bible as "inerrant" and now you are backing down and waffling in your excuses.

Which Bible is "inerrant"?

get over it brpster You made the distinction between kill and murder.

Regardless, marym and brpstr are quoting from the New Testament. It was written to accomodate newer views concerning Christ. This by definition is idolotry. Christ did exist. I found it doubtful that he was brought back from the dead. He was indeed a prophit. However, the eras during which he lived are likely incorrect in the bible. He most likely did not exist at the same time as Nazareth. Then of course is the problem of most of his life being ommited from the bible. The views that splintered from the Old Testament and the sons of Abraham are a bit far fetched. One profit returns from the dead and another is beamed into the sky(Islam). I respect all of your views and am always looking for answers. I simply do not understand how the Bible can be edited for content if it is inerrant.

Keith, you are off on a tangent not supported by any reliable Christian (and I mean born again conservative Christian) scholars of the Word. There is *no one* who will claim that all of the hand-copied manuscripts of the Bible until the printing press was invented were all exactly the same (because you can look in museums and see that that is not so). How you choose to explain that is up to you.
God has preserved His Word through at least 6000 years of history. I know it tells me God's words if I can read it in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. I have an English translation I prefer, but I certainly do not claim that God inspired the English translation (He was not still transmitting Scripture in 1607).
If you want to hold to minority positions on God's Word and how He inspired, preserved, and transmitted it, good luck with that. Maybe you can find some friends who hold to that same position instead of trying t

Look at our own language in the dictionary and see how many meanings each word has. The words are equal. You are just so full of hatred toward Christians that you will try anything.

Now "inerrant" becomes "approximately 5% difference".

Keith, the original manuscripts, now lost to us, were the exact Word of God, breathed from His mouth. Not all copies of those originals match each other exactly, although the Jewish scribal tradition produced the best handwritten copies of any book ever passed down generation to generation. There is approximately 5% difference in the old copies, none of which affects any major doctrines.

In your zeal to make people use the word "literal" do you also win a lot of people to the Lord Jesus Christ (the point for Christians being left on earth after their salvation)? I hope so! Cheers, MGM

Just a few weeks ago, you said the Bible was "inerrant". Now you make some wiggle room. What made you downgrade the credibility of the Bible?

Not the same word. You already made the distinction. Now you are just trying to make them equivalent.

The Bible is true. The translations from the ancient languages are made. Murder, kill, same word, can be translated either way. To believe you every different translation of the Bible other than King James is false, because they have made the wording easier for the new generation to read, since most of us don't speak that way anymore. You can not dispute the answer I gave you, so you try some lame trolling tactic.

Then by your own words, the Bible is not literally true.

Anyone can pull a verse from the Bible to try to suit their needs. What you need to do is read the rest of the book of Deuteronomy,where it explains each of the 10 commandments, especilly chapter 19 1 - 13. Where it talks of the cities of refuge. Where people who had accidently killed someone could take refuge until a court could decide whether it was an accident or not, so that the blood revenge (The law of the day, where the next of kin of the deceased had the right to kill the killer.) could not be carried out. If it was an accident, blood revenge was called off. If it was however a case of murder, then the court turned the killer over to the avenger of blood to carry out the execution. SO, yes I believe in the death penalty, as it says so in the Bible. And as a side note, the original text word actually says murder, not kill.

I was merely responding to your kind of absolute statement that no one can know the truth till they pass on--saying that some of us are quite confident that we can pass on in Christ and know for sure that our future will be with Him!
Many will say that our evidence is the way He has changed our sinful lives merely by becoming part of them!
But there really are scholarly works on the Bible as a text--I've studied them in seminary. The Dead Sea Scrolls are pretty good evidence that the Old Testament was transmitted pretty exactly from generation to generation. There is a copy of the book of Mark (New Testament) that was probably made in the 2nd century. Archeology keeps proving, rather than disproving, the Biblical account (ancient civilizations like Ur of the Chaldees and the Hittites are being excavated--scoffers used to say the Bible made them up!). So, there's that, too. Cheers, MGM

So you are against the death penalty because the Bible tells you to be. Is that correct?
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%205%20;&version=9;

17Thou shalt not kill.

I never said I do not believe in an eternal life. In actuality I do. Maybe not in the way you do, but I do. My point however is more along the lines that organized religion is not the only path to wherever we go after this life. I grew up Episcopalian and also spent some time attending Roman Catholic and Methodist churches. I have been Baptized and went through confirmation while attending an Episcopal church. But that is moot. If we want to debate, the debate for me is the "truth" to the writings, as I have mentioned before. By quoting verse to make a point about whether the writings are "truth" or not is invalid. One cannot debate the validity of a statement (or writing) by using that very statement as some sort of proof. That is the problem with religion and therein lies my point. I have explained myself and do not expcect anyone to see that as me trying to change them as I expect no one to try to change me. W

Christ claimed in I John 5:13 that it *is* possible to know we have eternal life before we pass on. With all due respect to my Orthodox friends, you, and others who don't believe that, there is a sizable number of folks out there who do know for sure that they have found salvation for this world and the next. And . . . that is not based on us being some superior group of humans, but just folks who realized our own sinfulness and turned to Jesus. Cheers, MGM

sorry, you're right the question was asked by someone else. Hard to read sometimes through my cataracts. I respect your opinions as well, and the point that I made in my first comment on this post is, it is a 1st Amendment situation. If she didn't like what he was saying, she could just move along. Take care PD.

I did not ask you if you believed if the Bible was literally true. That was asked of you by another poster. I repsect your opinions and as with all things you have a right to those beliefs. I may not be a true Christian in your books and that is fine with me. I live my life as a believer in a higher power and to me that power does not recognize one religion over another. All religions were formed as though they had the lock on the truth but we know that cannot be true as everyone cannot be right given all the variations of religions humans have formed. But my purpose here is not to debate who "knows" better because that is an exercise in futility and what conclusions I have come to are not the ones others come to. Even our founding fathers in our great country were quite perplexed about the whole religion issue. The truth is we do not know the truth until we pass. Until then it is only inspiration that guides us. Que

Yes I do believe the Bible is literally true.

Whoever asked how we would sort out one true faith from among all the world religions--good question. One worthy of seeking out an answer in this life. Read the "good books" of every major religion--compare and contrast them--see what you find. I am a believer in Jesus Christ since age 14 but . . . having read about the other world faiths, I found I was able to piece together history and my beliefs in a way that is not only coherent, but comforting for me as I battle breast cancer at this very moment. I won't tell anyone that Jesus is a real person to me and can be to them. I think if anyone will honestly read the New Testament, they might very well discover that for themselves. Read all of the other books, too--Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim. Form your own conclusions. But pls do take the time to seek out the truth while you are in this world. If this life matters for the next one, you need to know for sure what your b

Do you believe the "whole Bible" is literally true?

Those before Christ came and died for our sins, were covered under the old blood sacrifice laws. Jesus became the final blood sacrafice for the entire world, from then through the end of time. The Bible was God inspired, not open for interpretation as to what to believe and what not to believe. The Bible also does not teach any denomination, it teaches Christ (which is where the term christian comes from), so to be a believer you have to have faith and trust Jesus and believe the Bible. There are many demoninations in the Christian faith, most have added their own beliefs in with the Bible. But a true Christian takes the whole Bible as THE word of God, and follows the doctrines taught in that book.

By trying to say it was written by who knows who, or what the societal beliefs were in those days, is like saying how do you know the Constitution or any other historical document or book is true.

I am a believer of Jesus and his existence and his efforts to enlighten the world. However I know that his "words" were not written in his time but many decades (even centuries) afterwards. What we have is writngs by who knows whom written who really knows when and for what reason. One would have to safely sumise that those who wrote the words were influenced by the societal norms of the day as well as the dogma to which they were beginnng to subscribe. But that is what I have come to realize. For others it may be different. But as your last quote says that the only way to God is through Jesus. What about those who came before Jesus? Are they condemned to the netherworld for living earlier? My experience with organized religion raised more questions than it answered and was forcing me to think contrary to my experience and my instincts. Of all the religions past and present how do we know who was right, if

"What if we really all *are* sinners in need of salvation through Jesus Christ? Would it be good for kids to hear that?"

What if the people passing by were part of the worlds majority that does not beleive in Christianity? What if these people believed that worshiping Christ was idolotry as defined by the Old Testament? What id the 'devil' had actually been slighted by history? Would it be free speech if the speaker was wearing a devil costume and shouting for people to come to the "dark side?"

you are right in your comparison of people. And yes you do not have to follow a certain denomination to be a believer. But Jesus says in the Bible, "where two or more are gathered in my name, there I will be also"
and lets not forget that he also said, "I am the way, the truth and the light, no man shall enter my father's kingdom but through me."

But you are so right on people.

Many people make the false assumption that to believe in God you must follow religion. I do not attend a church not because I am an atheist but because I have little time for the business that is organized religion. Dogma is what follows religion and it prescribes that one give up common sense and reality to believe in myths and that by doing certain mundane activities over and over you somehow achieve a better seat in the hereafter. Religion is man-made pure and simple. My child is taught to repsect others, to help the less fortunate, to give and share, to be productive and self sufficient, and not to judge others. We talk of God and of Jesus and the overall message of being a good person. And as I have learned people can be "religious" but not necessarily decent people. And an atheist can live a life much closer to the golden rules than a religion follower.