chronology of the bible

chronology of the bible

One of the many things that I have found concerning the Christian faith is the issue of the time of writing and events in the bible. Most Christians believe that the bible is without question, "The word of God", from a trustworthy, inspired, infallible, omniscient, divinely inspired, inerrant and infallible source.

For example, The church universal, most churches, the vast majority of believers and scholars consider the gospel of Matthew to have been written by Matthew, and is therefore inerrant. This gospel is found in three forms, the first being the book of Matthew (the first gospel book), the second being the book of Mark (the second gospel book), and the third being Luke's gospel book (3rd gospel book), and it is all said to be the work of Matthew.

These three books cover from Jesus Christ’s birth to his death, and are said to have been written by Matthew, though he is not the only named author of any of these books. The majority of scholars believe that there were other authors besides Matthew. However, if this is true, then it is still within the bounds of the church, and thus the bible, to say that Matthew is trustworthy, reliable, truthful, and the source of everything.

If Matthew is the source of the bible, then the scriptures of the gospel of Matthew are also the scriptures of all Christians, and are without question God’s word. It is also common for Christians to believe that the other books of the bible are inspired, which means that they contain the word of God, and that the other writers are trustworthy. It is also common for believers to also think that the other writers, like the other books of the bible, are the work of a single person. This is the basis for the belief that the books of the Bible are "The word of God", meaning that God himself is the writer of these books. I believe that the scriptures themselves would prove that they are not inerrant and inspired. I am not speaking about the gospel of Matthew in particular, because it is said to have been written by Matthew, and Matthew has been deemed trustworthy.

I am speaking about the entire bible, though I will show that my belief is true for the entire bible as a whole. I would like to show that the Bible is inaccurate on a number of points, and the only evidence that we have that this is true is the words of God himself himself. For this reason I am going to post the evidence that I have concerning my stance on the accuracy of the bible, and whether or not it is inspired. If I am to be taken seriously then I must present my evidence on how I came to my beliefs, and that is what I shall do. First I will state a few things. The most important thing is that the Bible contains contradictions. There is a lot of controversy over this, but I believe that they exist because the Bible is the words of men, and the best of men. The Bible is often said to have been written by “prophets” who were men. For example, Moses was supposed to be a man, and Joseph Smith was thought to be a prophet, and the apostles were thought to be prophets as well. And the Bible has many other writers, like the apostle Paul.

I have never read any of these men’s writings, except for a few lines in Paul’s writings. Because of this I can’t speak about their writings, so I will let their words speak for themselves. As I said before, the Bible is the words of men, so why would these men be inerrant, if in fact that is what the Bible says about itself.

One of the most popular things to believe about the Bible is that it was written by multiple authors. The most common way to say that this is that the books of the Bible are inerrant, but that there were many different writers. For example, one book may be inerrant, and that book may be about the history of Jesus, or it may be a part of a larger book that is about the history of the world, or it may be that the Bible is about the Christian faith in general, which means that it is about God’s law, and it is a Christian gospel. The gospel of Matthew says that there were other people who wrote about Jesus.

This was true in the past, and is true now. It is said that the gospel of Luke wrote the book of Luke, as well as many other books. However, it is often stated that Jesus was not one of the authors of the gospel of Luke. The gospel of Matthew says that Matthew wrote the gospel, and this was said to be true as well. But Matthew wrote this after Jesus’ death, and so all that Matthew wrote is said to be about Jesus. How can this be if the other books of the Bible are about “the word of God” and it’s a history book, or a Christian gospel? If it’s about God’s law, or the Christian gospel, then why would it be necessary to retell things about God’s law, or what the Christian faith is? The whole Bible contains contradictions. For example, if it is the word of God, and that Jesus was the son of God, as the bible says, then it would be a little contradictory for the other books to also claim this, even if they were written by the same men as the bible, and say that Matthew and Luke had the same “word of God”. The Christian faith says that the gospel of Luke was written by the same man who wrote the gospel of Matthew. And yet, we have the other writers saying that Matthew wrote his gospel. So, all this would imply is...

Read more....