The Bible is infallible
In reply to Bruce Braden's Jan. 29 letter “Contradictions in the Bible,” the reason for the curse of mankind was Satan deceived Eve. We're still dealing with this because of people like Mr. Braden and his beliefs.
I am a Bible student and the Lord's spirit that dwells in me enabled me to write five books about God's glorious acts. My book, “I and My Father Are One,” is used in a Protestant church in Michigan for Scripture reference.
The Bible has more bibliographical support than classical literature from Homer, Aristotle and Shakespeare. The Greek and Hebrew scholars did their research — word for word — regarding the infallibility of our Bible. It also contains amazing prophetic accuracy, most notably Jesus' resurrection.
Simon Greenleaf, a law professor and atheist in the 1880s, was the world's greatest evidence expert. He researched the four Gospels and Jesus' resurrection. He found it all to be true and became a Christian — the truth set him free!
Each of the four Gospels focus on different acts. For example, only Luke tells of the virgin birth. Matthew 27:50-56, tells that after Jesus' resurrection, some of the graves opened and many bodies of the saints had risen. And in John 3:3, Jesus tells us we must be reborn spiritually to enter heaven and be able to understand the Scriptures.
Ask Jesus to be your personal savior.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Incomprehensible? That’s Obama
- Reverse red-kettle ban I
- Reverse red-kettle ban II
- Good riddance
- No ground troops