bible

[Dude#1279435]

Months back after I believe an archeological discovery it was announced they have the evidence to prove the bible or some part of history is true. This news piece said We're still waiting for that evidence. LOL.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Months back after I believe an archeological discovery it was announced they have the evidence to prove the bible or some part of history is true. This news piece said We're still waiting for that evidence. LOL.

Actually I think that was the intent: make an announcement to its fact and leave it there.

Also, just stop debating the bible as truth. It was created centuries ago. Nobody knows, and when they say they know, they don't know. I'd recommend a more spiritual belief in god, like some of the music. Frankly people attending and the joy it brings nothing wrong with that. It's a beautiful thing, but otherwise nobody knows on the bible. They had one chance to get it right a long time ago, and they didn't. The bible will forever be an obstacle to a belief in god.

 

[highfigh]

Actually I think that was the intent: make an announcement to its fact and leave it there.

Also, just stop debating the bible as truth. It was created centuries ago. Nobody knows, and when they say they know, they don't know. I'd recommend a more spiritual belief in god, like some of the music. Frankly people attending and the joy it brings nothing wrong with that. It's a beautiful thing, but otherwise nobody knows on the bible. They had one chance to get it right a long time ago, and they didn't. The bible will forever be an obstacle to a belief in god.

WRT who knows what about the writings that were used to create the Bible- the third Abrahamic religion says the other two mis-interpreted them, which I find odd since that religion didn't begin until ~600CE.

 

[Dude#1279435]

WRT who knows what about the writings that were used to create the Bible- the third Abrahamic religion says the other two mis-interpreted them, which I find odd since that religion didn't begin until ~600CE.

I suspect the top religious historians would not be willing to take their argument to an objective court.

 

[Dude#1279435]

I like to continually refer back to these in my first post....

If the Bible were really the work of a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God, one would reasonably expect it to be superlative in every respect—accurate, clear, concise, and consistent throughout—as compared to anything that could possibly be conceived by human intellect alone.

-------

While biblicists are capable of offering some sort of explanation for nearly every biblical problem that has been uncovered, such explanations should be unnecessary. The point is not whether some explanation can be conceived, but rather that a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God certainly could, should, and would do a much better job of it were he to have anything to do with the writing of a book. In fact, anything less than perfection would necessarily negate God's alleged omnipotence and/or perfection.

Also.....

Why was there a "New" Testament (vs Old)?
Stoning people (translation: stoning people LOL)
Humans have never agreed fully on anything. Yet somehow the Bible they got that one right.

 

[highfigh]

I like to continually refer back to these in my first post....

If the Bible were really the work of a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God, one would reasonably expect it to be superlative in every respect—accurate, clear, concise, and consistent throughout—as compared to anything that could possibly be conceived by human intellect alone.

-------

While biblicists are capable of offering some sort of explanation for nearly every biblical problem that has been uncovered, such explanations should be unnecessary. The point is not whether some explanation can be conceived, but rather that a perfect, all-powerful, and loving God certainly could, should, and would do a much better job of it were he to have anything to do with the writing of a book. In fact, anything less than perfection would necessarily negate God's alleged omnipotence and/or perfection.

Also.....

Why was there a "New" Testament (vs Old)?
Stoning people (translation: stoning people LOL)
Humans have never agreed fully on anything. Yet somehow the Bible they got that one right.

Stoning still occurs in the Middle East.

The Bible was collated from several languages- if it were to be understood as the same text by all who read it, shouldn't that happen automatically?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Stoning still occurs in the Middle East.

The Bible was collated from several languages- if it were to be understood as the same text by all who read it, shouldn't that happen automatically?

I don't understand your point.

 

[highfigh]

I don't understand your point.

Which, about stoning or automatic understanding?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Which, about stoning or automatic understanding?

If there's still stoning in the ME than that's a religion that takes the Bible literally. People have evolved to not take the Bible literally. Nor do all the other religions take the bible literally. Therefore the New Testament was created, and that God couldn't have written the Bible because it was flawed to begin with.

 

[highfigh]

If there's still stoning in the ME than that's a religion that takes the Bible literally. People have evolved to not take the Bible literally. Nor do all the other religions take the bible literally. Therefore the New Testament was created, and that God couldn't have written the Bible because it was flawed to begin with.

Really? You think the ones who are stoning read the freaking Bible???? Have you heard of Islam?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Really? You think the ones who are stoning read the freaking Bible???? Have you heard of Islam?

Well I suppose not. Yet isn't stoning in the bible?

 

[Tankini]

Well I suppose not. Yet isn't stoning in the bible?

Yep it is, Old Testament. Also in The Old Testament God, struck down two that lied about something they did and denied, died immediately according to the scripture.

 

[Dude#1279435]

https://www.proquest.com/docview/911954210?sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals

This paper examines the scriptural bases of stoning for adultery in the two sister religions and its implementation in contemporary Muslim societies. Based upon archival and documentary research, this study found that stoning to death for adultery is prescribed in both the Bible and the Qur'an. Christians, however, have abandoned this law and it is no longer practiced in any Christian-dominant country. With the expansion of Western imperialism, the same trend seems to be taking place in Muslim societies. There are a few Muslim countries that are trying to implement this law but they face a good deal of criticism from the Western media and other secular organizations, consequently, shying away from implementing this punishment in public.

 

[highfigh]

Well I suppose not. Yet isn't stoning in the bible?

It is but it's still happening and Islam came along in about 610 CE, as I mentioned (after searching)- have you compared that to the other Abrahamic religions? Look at the similarities- same Sabbath day, Halal and Kosher are very similar, many other details of the three religions are the same and yet, Muslims believe that the other two religions which were established before, that used the same writings and teaching, got it wrong.

Does the fact that it's in the Bible make it OK to do this now? They still cut hands off and that's in the Bible. Not a tolerant religion. Christianity places God higher than Man, Islam worships a man and forbids images of Muhammad but their God is the same as in Judao-Christian religions- they don't see him as God, but go nuts if someone creates images of him. They also ban images of Jesus and Moses- from what I have read, Jesus goes to heaven and Muhammad stays on Earth on Judgement Day.

I have a real problem with 'killing in the name of God'.

 

[Dude#1279435]

It is but it's still happening and Islam came along in about 610 CE, as I mentioned (after searching)- have you compared that to the other Abrahamic religions? Look at the similarities- same Sabbath day, Halal and Kosher are very similar, many other details of the three religions are the same and yet, Muslims believe that the other two religions which were established before, that used the same writings and teaching, got it wrong.

Does the fact that it's in the Bible make it OK to do this now? They still cut hands off and that's in the Bible. Not a tolerant religion. Christianity places God higher than Man, Islam worships a man and forbids images of Muhammad but their God is the same as in Judao-Christian religions- they don't see him as God, but go nuts if someone creates images of him. They also ban images of Jesus and Moses- from what I have read, Jesus goes to heaven and Muhammad stays on Earth on Judgement Day.

I have a real problem with 'killing in the name of God'.

Asking me to believe Jesus was the son of God to save humanity from the dark ages I'm not buying. (Didnt we evolve through trial & error??) Jesus could be any religious figure today. Or how you could even accurately confirm this from a book that can't even get the creation of night & day straight. It's much simpler if God just visited and told us clearly the truth. But wait! We can't handle God, so the whole thing gets shoved in the blender of convoluted.

 

[highfigh]

Asking me to believe Jesus was the son of God to save humanity from the dark ages I'm not buying. (Didnt we evolve through trial & error??) Jesus could be any religious figure today. Or how you could even accurately confirm this from a book that can't even get the creation of night & day straight. It's much simpler if God just visited and told us clearly the truth. But wait! We can't handle God, so the whole thing gets shoved in the blender of convoluted.

That's one of the details Muslims disagree with, too.

It was written after the fact, by people who may/may not have been educated in any way and it's mostly second or third hand info. Then, the RC church stuck its big ol' face in and took over for hundreds of years, until the Orthodox church told them 'Oh no, you di'n't!" at the time of the schism. RC was in charge, Henry VIII wanted to divorce his wife and the Anglican church was born.

It may have been about worship at first, then it was used to control people. "Give us money and we'll help you", then "Sorry, we need to spend a ton of money (literally) and spend a couple of hundred years to build a new cathedral". Add "Those alter boys are looking attractive" and it's no wander they're losing members.

 

[Dude#1279435]

That's one of the details Muslims disagree with, too.

It was written after the fact, by people who may/may not have been educated in any way and it's mostly second or third hand info. Then, the RC church stuck its big ol' face in and took over for hundreds of years, until the Orthodox church told them 'Oh no, you di'n't!" at the time of the schism. RC was in charge, Henry VIII wanted to divorce his wife and the Anglican church was born.

It may have been about worship at first, then it was used to control people. "Give us money and we'll help you", then "Sorry, we need to spend a ton of money (literally) and spend a couple of hundred years to build a new cathedral". Add "Those alter boys are looking attractive" and it's no wander they're losing members.

How do you know this? It would seem then...

First Bible (word of god) >>
Old Testament (corrupt) >>
New Testament (near first book)

 

[Dude#1279435]

I'll never forget. I think it was a book. Basically along the lines of "Because it doesn't make sense, that's why it makes sense."

 

[highfigh]

How do you know this? It would seem then...

First Bible (word of god) >>
Old Testament (corrupt) >>
New Testament (near first book)

Do you not know how to research this stuff? It's part of World History.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Do you not know how to research this stuff? It's part of World History.

"How do you know this?"

As in how do you know there was a time where they got everything right? Then afterward they got it wrong with the Old Testament because that book was used to hijack the real truth. Seems to me God could just pop in for a second and explain it clearly and concisely.