Evidence for God from Science

Hello, I have had haunting thoughts about this for a while in the back of my mind and I thought I needed to release what it is. First of all, these haunting thoughts I have been having are the thoughts that the Bible is not really 100% final and complete the way it was intended to come out. I keep thinking there is a conspiracy going on in the Vatican. To me, it seems the Vatican is suppressing information from the public so the REAL truth is not known. Possibly that the Bible is lacking many books that aren't in our current Bibles, due to the fact that we KNOW our church fathers compiled and edited the Bible together of the books that were the best and the most informing. These missing books (links) however has been unearthed on the internet. I don't know if they are real or not if you do a google search on missing books from the Bible and look at them on the internet. From what I have seen, there seems to be a little over a hundred missing books, but I may have guessed it wrong. These articles that people publish about debunking the Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown (whos novel has become EXTREMELY popular!) is probably based on research only that they have access to. They don't have access to the Vatican to see what is being hidden away from the public. So these debunkers could be falsely debunking, because they base it off of only what they have access to. I believe in conspiracies in the U.S. Government, I believe there are conspiracies everywhere, but could it be very well true that there is also a conspiracy within the Vatican? The problem arises now for any person that responds to this post because they can only pull information that they know of, not from the hidden away from the public spaces the Vatican has. Can we ever know the full truth? EVER? Maybe this is why there are so many contradictions in the Bible, the missing books (links) provides the explanations to these contradictions. Like I said, it has been a haunting thought that goes through my mind literally every day. And to add to that from what we only know, our doctrines could be wrong, such as theology, philosophy, apologetics, etc...

The books apart of the Bible were never chosen by any one person or organisation, so therefore books not apart of the Bible couldn't have been intentionally added or removed by such as the RCC.

Kurieuo.

the Vatican was never the only church authority. There was the Orthodox church based out of Constantinople, Syriac churches, and Ethiopia.

I think this internet religion fad is going to start showing its true nature before long. People like HMG and many others are so confused by the amount of contradictory information that they are unable to sort it out. There is little scholarship on the net, very few people who have devoted their lives to the study of one issue. Who can trust what they say? Running a half second google search is not the same as studying an issue. There is some good in the internet but it is more than balanced by evil.

j316 wrote:I think this internet religion fad is going to start showing its true nature before long. People like HMG and many others are so confused by the amount of contradictory information that they are unable to sort it out. There is little scholarship on the net, very few people who have devoted their lives to the study of one issue. Who can trust what they say? Running a half second google search is not the same as studying an issue. There is some good in the internet but it is more than balanced by evil.

What are you talking about j316? Please expand.

Back before the cultural revolution of the sixties people got their religious instruction from their priests and pastors. These men, for the most part, were graduates of seminaries sponsored or owned by the major religious denominations. That tradition goes back hundreds of years and it lead to a body of knowledge that was well screened for the various misperceptions and heresies that have been a common thread throughout the history of the church. Most people were content to let the clergy handle religious research and thinking.

In our era we decided that we knew a better way, we were so much better informed and smarter than our ancestors that now we could become our own priests doctors and lawyers, especially now that we can instantly learn anything we want to know via the internet.

But what is on the internet? The answer is everyone. Everyone who has any opinion at all about any subject at all. The problem here is that if you don't know who they are and what their backgrounds are, how can you tell how valid their information is? How do you know, assuming you are not an expert in the field you are exploring, whether or not they really know what they are talking about.

From what I can see many of them are doing the same thing everybody else is, running searches and abstracting information from them that happens to fit whatever preconceptions they have. JP Holding is a good example as he has been cited often on this forum. Holding may or may not even be his true name, he won't say for sure, he has a degree in library science and belongs to a baptist church. These are the credentials of a theologian? His degree helps him to guickly locate information, but it doesn't mean he totally understands it. There are too many people like him out there.

Before I get a lot of negative responses let me make a point. Clergymen assume a responsibility for the spiritual welfare of their flocks, and I would say that the Lord will hold them to that to some extent. The same is true of anyone who sets out to preach or teach on God's word. I do not like seeing people who take no more responsiblity for their work than using spellcheck to ensure it is readable. If you are claiming insight into God's word let me know who you are and where you got that insight so I can judge for myself how accurate it might be. We are told to watch out for false prophets, so how do we identify them in an incresingly anonymous world?

You all need to pay more attention to where your information comes from, and you need to decide who you can trust for confirmation or refutation of some of the stuff you run across, if you don't you will simply be treading water in the sea of information that is the current internet.

The Bible is a book that's been very closely guarded by God throughout it's lifespan. It's just incredible. Read Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict and it'll shock you, hopefully, as it did me. To see there's proof out there for God's protection of it... just stunning. God's so good to provide that information for our peace of mind. The Bible is a holy book that is given from God to us. It's God's word, and it's alive. It's a living book that the Spirit utilizes to communicate to us what God wants to tell us.

"The truth is out there," but not in the form of a conspiracy that has left the Bible full of lies or misleading half-truths. The truth is that it is in fact the Word of God, and that it can be trusted as such!

kateliz wrote:The Bible is a book that's been very closely guarded by God throughout it's lifespan. It's just incredible. Read Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict and it'll shock you, hopefully, as it did me. To see there's proof out there for God's protection of it... just stunning. God's so good to provide that information for our peace of mind. The Bible is a holy book that is given from God to us. It's God's word, and it's alive. It's a living book that the Spirit utilizes to communicate to us what God wants to tell us.

"The truth is out there," but not in the form of a conspiracy that has left the Bible full of lies or misleading half-truths. The truth is that it is in fact the Word of God, and that it can be trusted as such!

So true!

j316 wrote:Back before the cultural revolution of the sixties people got their religious instruction from their priests and pastors. These men, for the most part, were graduates of seminaries sponsored or owned by the major religious denominations. That tradition goes back hundreds of years and it lead to a body of knowledge that was well screened for the various misperceptions and heresies that have been a common thread throughout the history of the church. Most people were content to let the clergy handle religious research and thinking.

In our era we decided that we knew a better way, we were so much better informed and smarter than our ancestors that now we could become our own priests doctors and lawyers, especially now that we can instantly learn anything we want to know via the internet.

But what is on the internet? The answer is everyone. Everyone who has any opinion at all about any subject at all. The problem here is that if you don't know who they are and what their backgrounds are, how can you tell how valid their information is? How do you know, assuming you are not an expert in the field you are exploring, whether or not they really know what they are talking about.

From what I can see many of them are doing the same thing everybody else is, running searches and abstracting information from them that happens to fit whatever preconceptions they have. JP Holding is a good example as he has been cited often on this forum. Holding may or may not even be his true name, he won't say for sure, he has a degree in library science and belongs to a baptist church. These are the credentials of a theologian? His degree helps him to guickly locate information, but it doesn't mean he totally understands it. There are too many people like him out there.

Before I get a lot of negative responses let me make a point. Clergymen assume a responsibility for the spiritual welfare of their flocks, and I would say that the Lord will hold them to that to some extent. The same is true of anyone who sets out to preach or teach on God's word. I do not like seeing people who take no more responsiblity for their work than using spellcheck to ensure it is readable. If you are claiming insight into God's word let me know who you are and where you got that insight so I can judge for myself how accurate it might be. We are told to watch out for false prophets, so how do we identify them in an incresingly anonymous world?

You all need to pay more attention to where your information comes from, and you need to decide who you can trust for confirmation or refutation of some of the stuff you run across, if you don't you will simply be treading water in the sea of information that is the current internet.

J.P. Holding isn't his real name, but he does tons of research with what he has since he has a degree in library science and belongs to a baptist church. I trust what he says, he also has people help him. Once you get down to reading A LOT of what is out there on God, you can sift through the truth and lies to find what fits as truth. I believe J.P. Holding is good at this. A lot of the research he does is handy because he makes sure it is right. I follow what he does and compare it to other websites like it and they match up pretty well, however, J.P. Holding is more elaborate. I trust his work is truth and is good which holds to the format of the Bible, but the real deal is the Bible itself, it doesn't get better than that.

j316, well said!

It is extremely important to check the writer's credentials and also know, as a result of them, what his particular bias might be.
It is good, where you can, to read debates between that writer and his peers, so you can see how his argument holds up to the scrutiny of others with similar credentials.
And always remember the advice given in Thessalonians 5:21 - "Test everything. Hold on to the good."

It is also a good idea when putting forward your own case for something to include reputable references as well. Otherwise you are offering unsubstantiated opinion that may hold no weight at all unless you have recognized qualifications yourself in that subject. Even then, including references gives added authority to what you are saying.

So... always read critically what you read on the internet.

I think we also have to accept that the Church (Orthodox or the Roman Catholic) indeed tried to hide things from the common laity. I mean, didn't they burn and destroy the other gospels they see unfit to be included in the Bible? And didn't they persecute and execute those who preach those they called "heretical" teachings? After the Church was given military power upon institutionalizing it under Constantine, didn't the Church exercised that power with great harshness to crush other preachings? The gnostic gospels for example.

And how about that letter supposedly found in a monastery near Jerusalem that speaks about the Gospel of Mark being edited? A certain letter allegedly made by Bishop Clement of Alexandria discussing about the "Real Gospel of Mark" wherein the bishop admitted that it does good to edit the gospel? And that letter was then destroyed by somebody who basically don't want it found.

Icei_Nhell wrote:I think we also have to accept that the Church (Orthodox or the Roman Catholic) indeed tried to hide things from the common laity. I mean, didn't they burn and destroy the other gospels they see unfit to be included in the Bible? And didn't they persecute and execute those who preach those they called "heretical" teachings? After the Church was given military power upon institutionalizing it under Constantine, didn't the Church exercised that power with great harshness to crush other preachings? The gnostic gospels for example.

And how about that letter supposedly found in a monastery near Jerusalem that speaks about the Gospel of Mark being edited? A certain letter allegedly made by Bishop Clement of Alexandria discussing about the "Real Gospel of Mark" wherein the bishop admitted that it does good to edit the gospel? And that letter was then destroyed by somebody who basically don't want it found.

How about some sources?

I don't know where I learned them but correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Irenaus, Bishop Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Hippolytus attacked the Gnostics and branded them heretical? And wasn't heresy punishable by death then?

The Secret Gospel of Mark...I've read from the "heretical" book by Henry Lincoln and his cohorts - Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Made research about it and it did say something about a certain Professor Morton Smith reported in 1960 in the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature that he has discovered an epistle allegedly written by Clement of Alexandria mentioning about this gospel. However, nobody from outside the Mar Saba monastery (except Morton) have actually seen this epistle.

Icei_Nhell wrote:I don't know where I learned them but correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Irenaus, Bishop Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Hippolytus attacked the Gnostics and branded them heretical? And wasn't heresy punishable by death then?

The Secret Gospel of Mark...I've read from the "heretical" book by Henry Lincoln and his cohorts - Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Made research about it and it did say something about a certain Professor Morton Smith reported in 1960 in the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature that he has discovered an epistle allegedly written by Clement of Alexandria mentioning about this gospel. However, nobody from outside the Mar Saba monastery (except Morton) have actually seen this epistle.

This was early on around the time of the council of Nicea.

I'm not familiar with Gnostics being executed as Heretics at this time. The cannon was being established at that time and certainly a great deal of apocryphal and pseudopigraphal writings were floating around. Most were recognized as not being particularly valuable because there was no evidence of an apostolic line of authority that spoke in favor of them.

I've studied a lot of the gnostic scriptures, particularly those found at Nag Hammadi. If you wish to argue that they were of equal authority or authenticity, then by all means let me know what you have in that area and we can discuss it.

Holy Blood Holy Grail is hardly a very credible source and a book that nobody has seen is about as valuable as a UFO siting.

So, do you have any sources to back up your claims?

Gnostics may not have been executed during that time but they were persecuted later on.

Can you please identify the "apostolic lineage" of the four NT gospels compared to the gnostics? I would like to hear this.

Nobody has seen that epistle outside the monastary because it was taken out and noted as "being recondotioned" but it never returned as we speak. Fishy.

Holy Blood, Holy Grail was not considered credible despite their research because they were branded as heretical. Being heretical is considered "non-credible" by the Church.