The Bible Confirms Itself

[NBTT]

Here's a visual representation (source) of how the bible confirms itself. It is a graph of 63,779 cross references between different books of the bible. It is practically impossible for an author to self reference himself multiple times without creating contradictions and/or dilemmas. See how the quran fails this test in this other thread. For tens of authors to pull this off over centuries in a handful of languages is enough to make you believe in the Holy Spirit inspiring the bible.

This reminds me of the story a man exploring the jungle and is captured by a tribe who condemns him to death. The chief asks the man for his last words saying if your last words are true you will die quickly with a spear to the heart. If your last words are false you will die slowly by torture. After a moment of reflection the man stated "I will die by torture". The chief being a man of his word was forced to release the man.

Bible critics often accuse Christians of circular arguments by using the bible to support itself. When the number of self-references becomes this extreme yet the bible remains coherent, consistent and true, self-reference becomes and incredibly powerful strength instead of a weakness.

PS.
The bar chart that runs along the bottom represents all of the chapters in the Bible, starting with Genesis 1 on the left. Books alternate in color between light and dark gray, with the first book of the Old and New Testaments in white. The length of each bar denotes the number of verses in that chapter (for instance, the longest bar is the longest chapter in the Bible, Psalm 119). Each of the 63,779 cross references found in the Bible are depicted by a single arc - the color corresponds to the distance between the two chapters, creating a rainbow-like effect.

 

[NBTT]

Take a look at a very similar but circular graph of the catholic bible that includes the apocrypha. It becomes very clear that the additional section of that bible doesn't belong.

Here's the Instagram link to the image.

I received this diagram from a cousin through WhatsApp (unknown author). It represents the incredible interconnection between Bible books.

But there is an important detail to consider in this diagram: the Bible represented here is a Catholic Bible, which includes the books known to Catholics as “Deuterocanonical” (or “second canon”) and to Protestants as “Apocrypha” or “Pseudepigrapha” (books of falsely attributed authorship or titles). These books were added later by the Catholic Church as a way to support certain doctrines that had been developed over time.

Although they appear between Malachi and Matthew in this Bible — as shown in the diagram — it’s important to note that they were never accepted by the Jews as part of the Old Testament canon. And since Paul states that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews (Romans 3:2), Protestants understand that the canon recognized by the Jews is the one that should be followed — that is, without the later additions.

This is why Protestants adhere to the Jewish Old Testament and do not recognize these additional books as inspired. The term “Apocrypha” means “hidden” or “lacking canonical authority.”

Now, look again at the diagram: notice how the books of the Bible are deeply and coherently interconnected. Also observe that the added books show very little or almost no connection with the rest of Scripture. This lack of integration is further evidence that these books do not belong to the biblical canon.

 

[Richard Aberdeen]

Take a look at a very similar but circular graph of the catholic bible that includes the apocrypha. It becomes very clear that the additional section of that bible doesn't belong.

Here's the Instagram link to the image.

I received this diagram from a cousin through WhatsApp (unknown author). It represents the incredible interconnection between Bible books.

But there is an important detail to consider in this diagram: the Bible represented here is a Catholic Bible, which includes the books known to Catholics as “Deuterocanonical” (or “second canon”) and to Protestants as “Apocrypha” or “Pseudepigrapha” (books of falsely attributed authorship or titles). These books were added later by the Catholic Church as a way to support certain doctrines that had been developed over time.

Although they appear between Malachi and Matthew in this Bible — as shown in the diagram — it’s important to note that they were never accepted by the Jews as part of the Old Testament canon. And since Paul states that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews (Romans 3:2), Protestants understand that the canon recognized by the Jews is the one that should be followed — that is, without the later additions.

This is why Protestants adhere to the Jewish Old Testament and do not recognize these additional books as inspired. The term “Apocrypha” means “hidden” or “lacking canonical authority.”

Now, look again at the diagram: notice how the books of the Bible are deeply and coherently interconnected. Also observe that the added books show very little or almost no connection with the rest of Scripture. This lack of integration is further evidence that these books do not belong to the biblical canon.

Archaeology confirms the Bible, which you can read about here:

 

[NBTT]

Did you forget the link?

I know archaeology confirms that the bible is historically accurate but humans can write history without the help of the Holy Spirit.

The point above is that the opportunities for creating contradictions and/or dilemmas with all those self-references would only be possible by human writers inspired by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Did you forget the link?

I have removed the link this member has been using.
If really interested in where he is getting his information, please send him a Private Message and I'm sure he'll provide it to you there.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

 

[NBTT]

I have removed the link this member has been using.

Don't want to add extra burden to moderator duties but a brief phrase saying what was done by the moderator would be helpful. Ex. "Removed vulgar language", "Removed link to phishing site"...

I have no idea what I did wrong in post #2.

 

[Christ4Ever]

Don't want to add extra burden to moderator duties but a brief phrase saying what was done by the moderator would be helpful. Ex. "Removed vulgar language", "Removed link to phishing site"...

I have no idea what I did wrong in post #2.

Dear NBTT,
Sadly, when the message goes to queue by the system, adding a message to the originator is not an option. Which is usually available when staff are the initiator of the removal or edit not in queue. In that case a notification block allowing to state the reason is then available. Who knows, maybe a future modification for the queue will allow for that but currently it's not available.

As far as what has been removed was the link and that was all. I believe I mentioned that in a post that followed. Which by the way was originated originally by Member Richard Aberdeen. In that case, only an edit notification attached to the post itself is shown, unless it is egregious which in that case an added comment is sent to the originator of post, if the staff deems it necessary.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Moderator
Nick
\o/

 

[NBTT]

Yes post #5 explained what was done to post #3. I don't know what I did wrong in my moderator edited post #2.

What was changed should written be in the post itself. There is an implied guilt in the editing itself. Now I imagine a terrible thing was shared in post #3. Others will wonder about my crime in post #2 as do I.

 

[Richard Aberdeen]

Did you forget the link?

I know archaeology confirms that the bible is historically accurate but humans can write history without the help of the Holy Spirit.

The point above is that the opportunities for creating contradictions and/or dilemmas with all those self-references would only be possible by human writers inspired by the Holy Spirit.

I don't think you full grasp the significance of archaeology proving the Bible to be accurate. True faith is based on "the evidence of things not seen" and, evidence-based faith is what matters to any reasonable person.

This links has many links to archaeology verifying what the Bible claims.
(Deleted Link)

 

[NBTT]

I don't think you full grasp the significance of archaeology proving the Bible to be accurate.

Most historians worth their salt know the bible is a useful historical document but wouldn't believe it's the word of God. Prophesy that comes true is a proof that the bible is the word of God (DEUT 18:22) but that's a different thread.

This thread discusses that the incredible complexity of the bible is itself evidence of the bible being inspired.

 

[Richard Aberdeen]

You are not qualified to speak for "most historians" because you don't know them. Historians are individuals, just like the rest of us; some believe and some don't, the same as some scientists believe and some don't. We cannot speak for other people. We can only speak what we ourselves know.

It is highly significant that in the past 100 or so years, many historians have gone from claiming the Bible is mythology to now admitting that the Bible, as the Encyclopedia Brittanica states, "is mainly reliable history". This is due to significant evidence that wasn't available before the 20th and 21st Centuries, for key biblical figures such as Moses, David, Solomon and many others.

I personally believe the Bible is entirely history, but what the Britannica states is more significant than you apparently realize. The Britannica is considered by scholars to be the best source for human knowledge.

 

[NBTT]

This thread is about the bible internally confirming itself as Holy Spirit inspired by its own complex structure.

Please start a separate thread about an external source (archaeology) confirming the bible's historical accuracy.