Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting. I would say that the opinion of the author who wrote that prior to the 1,800 years of rewritting it, was talking about it in a population and not moral stance.
The writings of that time period were focused on societal law. And something definitely needed for that law was an expanding Jewish population.
This type of law would discourage male/male relations so to encourage reproductive relationships between men/women.
I look at the biblical writings not as holy, but as a set of laws to protect and expand the Jewish population.
I don't buy it was written about "holy morals", I buy that it was about order and survival of a small group of people.
Interesting. I would say that the opinion of the author who wrote that prior to the 1,800 years of rewritting it, was talking about it in a population and not moral stance.
Can you elaborate on when you think it was written, and the re-written?
Quote:
The writings of that time period were focused on societal law. And something definitely needed for that law was an expanding Jewish population.
This type of law would discourage male/male relations so to encourage reproductive relationships between men/women.
I look at the biblical writings not as holy, but as a set of laws to protect and expand the Jewish population.
I don't buy it was written about "holy morals", I buy that it was about order and survival of a small group of people.
Honestly, if you want to, you'll find a reason to disagree with it...that's fine. If you don't recognize the Bible as authoritative, so be it.
But to say that the Bible does not condemn homosexuality is either a smoke screen or ignorant.
So you just dismiss it? Was Paul incorrect about the reason for condemning it in the NT?
Professor Nestle writes: "Learned men called Correctores were, following the church meeting at Nicea 325 AD, selected by the church authorities to scrutinize the sacred texts and rewrite them in order to correct their meaning in accordance with the views which the church had just sanctioned."
you can find about 1,000 more of those.
you think the bible remained stagnant and in it's current form from 2,000 years ago ? from translation to translation in different languages and with local lore and customs being added and subtracted ?
Totally incorrect. I've done a fair amount of study on the subject, actually. You have no idea how many manuscripts we've got that prove that what we have is the original. Less than 1% of what is in the NT is in question.
As for the OT? The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and they showed that the book of Isaiah is the same as it was 1000 years earlier than the previous version of what we had.
I don't know what you mean by "translation to translation"....the Bible I have in my bag right now is translated from manuscripts discovered from around 100 AD.
Yeah...you can believe in it.
I doubt that you'd care to read it, but a good book on the subject is "Reinventing Jesus".
Totally incorrect. I've done a fair amount of study on the subject, actually. You have no idea how many manuscripts we've got that prove that what we have is the original. Less than 1% of what is in the NT is in question.
As for the OT? The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, and they showed that the book of Isaiah is the same as it was 1000 years earlier than the previous version of what we had.
I don't know what you mean by "translation to translation"....the Bible I have in my bag right now is translated from manuscripts discovered from around 100 AD.
Yeah...you can believe in it.
I doubt that you'd care to read it, but a good book on the subject is "Reinventing Jesus".
You gave me a link to a Christian Ministry's timeline and a religious writer's book !
You choose to get your information from sources that will continue your belief.
In the past, you have argued with me about the arching themes of the bible. But to me, christianity represents:
1. a message of love
2. a message of tolerance
3. a message of charity
i find people like you clueless because you distort this historic text's writing's to apply directly to modern times verbatim, and then use it to justify your repressive views.
If you want to understand the truth, look at it objectively. Believe me...I've studied this...you really don't have a clue.
Was Jesus just trying to set a good example when he was executed as a common criminal on a cross? And most of his followers were martyred as well?
Is it loving to let criminals go? Is it just? If I go and rape 10 women, then slit their throats, would it be loving, just and tolerant for the judge to let me go?
God must punish our sin--and that's why Christ was crucified. You're right--God is loving, tolerant and just--that's why he gave us a chance to be forgiven. I'm not saying that I'm any better than anyone else--I need a savior as much or more than anyone reading this.
If you want to understand the truth, look at it objectively. Believe me...I've studied this...you really don't have a clue.
Was it about love that Jesus was executed as a common criminal on a cross? And most of his followers were martyred as well?
Is it loving to let criminals go? Is it just? If I go and rape 10 women, then slit their throats, would it be loving, just and tolerant for the judge to let me go?
God must punish our sin--and that's why Christ was crucified. You're right--God is loving, tolerant and just--that's why he gave us a chance to be forgiven. I'm not saying that I'm any better than anyone else--I need a savior as much or more than anyone reading this.
Facts ?
c'mon kdbrich, you know i don't believe anything you say about politics or religion.
i'm kidding about that by the way, but i think you are wrong. bottom line. i don't believe that you use objective sources at all.
I believe you have studied the bible and read religious scholars theories, but i don't think you have a clue or maybe just turn a blind eye to the fact of what the world situation was like in from 2,400 years ago to the 17th century.
if you did, you would understand that changes were made and powerful people interpreted and rewrote the text to serve their needs.
and you give these crazy situations to explain love and justness ? why ?
i'm not talking about killing and rape, i'm talking about compassion and tolerance for those that don't harm others and are living as good people.
As I've apparently failed to get across--when you look at the textual analysis, you'll find that the Bible we have today is the same one that existed 2000 years ago.
It has not been re-written. We've got the manuscripts from thousands of years ago.
Regarding the crazy situations...you seem to have the notion that the Bible is a quaint fairy tale that we can live our lives by. I couldn't disagree with you more--it's much more than that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
