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.
If only everyone else on the A&A is like you, I'd enjoy that board. All I find there is grievance, disgruntlement and no class
Quote:
Originally Posted by Predos
If it so distasteful to you, why do you keep showing up?
If you have plenty of time and know how to use C/D's search engine, you can very well find out my posting frequency in the A&A. It's gonnabe a scanty number figure and I probably won't be proud of it.
I even corrected the [/quote] tag for the message's benefit.
It always amuses me in a sad way to hear today's sorry collection of atheists, seculars, humanists and other assorted moonbats slam the Bible and it's content and its long-deceased writers. These people, of course, then turn around and fall on their knees worshipping their "gods," science, politics and sociology (preferably in relationship to their love of socialism and "one world").
Modern day "literary critics" they are, panning the school of writers of 2-3,000 years ago (when actual writing things down was just beginning to catch on and take over from tribal storytellers). How assured, and haughty and superior they sound. It was a totally different planet and world back then, with different people and beliefs and cultures and languages. It has no relationship with this country's "modern" smug technocrats and shallow "American Idol" and "hip-hop" culture, and those people who worship and bend over for the Great God Science. They are gaga over their assertion that their science(s) "prove" everything. So by false analogy this then proves all their precious rationalizations and intellectualizations.
How sad.
Well, today science is hard at work proving something else:
I typed into Google and got this:
Results 1 - 10 of about 902,000 for biblicalarchaeology.
The facts are that these days this field is really coming to fruition. More and more facts are being uncovered which back-up and/or verify the Biblical accounts of the history of their time periods. Every week the History Channel and the National Geographic channel are broadcasting recent accounts of this branch of archaeology.
The speed has been slow but is picking up. Archaeology is by its nature slow and painstaking, and then much analyzation and interpretation of the results must make the rounds. But much of these results are revelatory in understanding how these ancients lived. BTW, this also applies to the ancient Egyptians, their language(s) and their culture, their thoughts and belief systems. Their histories back-up the Old Testament (even the Quran backs up The Old and New Testaments).
It is all on-going with new discoveries almost weekly. But people who post threads like this continually ignore this. Perhaps they are aware of it but try to ignore it. After all, proving Biblical history goes against every lie their libby-lefty professors told them, over and over and over, until they took it as some kind of (warped and distorted) "gospel."
It always amuses me in a sad way to hear today's sorry collection of atheists, seculars, humanists and other assorted moonbats slam the Bible and it's content and its long-deceased writers. These people, of course, then turn around and fall on their knees worshipping their "gods," science, politics and sociology (preferably in relationship to their love of socialism and "one world").
This atheist is not a proponent of socialism, and has not replaced god with government. I like good old individual freedom and responsibility. Atheists have wildly divergent beliefs, even within the realm of "atheism". Have some paint from your overly broad paintbrush.
Quote:
Well, today science is hard at work proving something else:
I typed into Google and got this:
Results 1 - 10 of about 902,000 for biblicalarchaeology.
The facts are that these days this field is really coming to fruition. More and more facts are being uncovered which back-up and/or verify the Biblical accounts of the history of their time periods. Every week the History Channel and the National Geographic channel are broadcasting recent accounts of this branch of archaeology.
...
It is all on-going with new discoveries almost weekly. But people who post threads like this continually ignore this. Perhaps they are aware of it but try to ignore it. After all, proving Biblical history goes against every lie their libby-lefty professors told them, over and over and over, until they took it as some kind of (warped and distorted) "gospel."
Y'all have a nice day.
The Bible is a *fine* archeological document, from which we humans can learn much about our human history and activity on this planet.
However, Archeology does not prove the existence of god. Confirming one aspect of a book as true does not immediately prove all aspects of the book as true. I can, in one paragraph, state something that is true and something that is false, and the fact that one is true does not change the fact the other is false.
Thus it is with any archeological study. One must separate the myth from verifiable fact.
Some parts of the Bible may contain some accurate historical facts. However, much of the OT was written during the Babylonian Captivity of the Israelites. The Israelites felt oppressed during the captivity so the portion of the Bible they wrote had a heroic slant to their characters. Much of the OT is also a competition of the Hebrew’s God with that of other Gods, man’s projection of who/what God is, and Mans’ limited view of the world during those times.
The Bible may not be completely fiction but it is not completely the inspired, inerrant word of God either.
Since a moderator was offended by my assertion that the Bible is fiction, I figured I would start a thread about that concept.
I maintain that it is circular logic to aver that it is the infallible word of God when the only authority for that statement is the book itself.
Men chose what writings went into what is known as the Bible, whatever translation/version you care to name, and they had specific (usually political) reasons for choosing what the did.
What are your thoughts?
Some events such as the Noachian flood did not happen. You will find it in the Gilgamesh which predates Noah. Either way it is not possible for the flood to have eradicated all other peoples. However, there is a large incorporation of Sumerian mytho's.
Something that I have found interesting is that the dieties of other cultures become angels. I think that this is repetitive though in any culture. Win a war and reorganize the pantheon. This means that also incorporated are very real wars.
I just finished reading The Book of David by David Rosenberg. He wrote extensively on disassociation in the written works of "Hebrew Aboriginals". This wiping away of a culture that was deemed too primitive.
I am also just beginning The Lost Apostle: Searching for the Truth About Junia by Rena Pederson. Heck they tried to wipe her out by changing her gender.
Good thing the Bible wasn't an "edited" piece of work to make things look good.
If the church wanted to "edit" it, there are plenty of things that people like you point to as contradictions that could have been removed.
Ummmm...we already know something like 10 books were left out of the Bible including the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And I hate to break it too you, but that beloved "King James Version" bible so many cling too was named that for a reason. King James had a hand in the editing of the Bible. How many other times in history it has been tampered with I don't know, but I do know that the "New International Bible" is ridiculously different. They say they changed the wording so people could more easily understand the book in today's language. But the meaning of a verse can be changed with one word, and that is what has happened in the New International. So this would be a second example of the editing of the Holy Bible that I can directly point out to you.
If you don't believe me, go and get yourself a really old bible from a used book store, and compare the writings with the New International. You will see it for yourself and possibly even wonder why so many words were changed when they so obviously changed the meaning of the writing. And to think so many churches actually switched to this version. It was really funny one Sunday. I am sitting in church, reading along with the verse the preacher is reading, and on the last line a word was changed. I have an old bible, and the preacher was using a new international just like the rest of the church. And I was dumbfounded by the discussion that followed because it had nothing to do with what that verse was really about. Soon after I stopped going to church, in favor of studying religion on my own. Which would probably be a good choice for a lot of church goers. Because one truth that is very clear is this. That building is not the church, the people are the church. But church goers identify church with the building, and therefore many only feel the necessity to act in a Christian manner while in the Holy Place. Communication with God will only come from within you, no preacher can speak for you and no membership will make you a better person. And no book which has passed through the hands of so many men should be completely trusted at face value. So much has been changed over the years it would be very hard to determine what is the actual word, and what has been added.
One example. Did you know Christians actually believed in reincarnation for the first 300 or so years of the religion. That is, until the Roman emperor Constantine embraced the religion and shaped it behind his own ideals. Oh, well there is another example of editing I guess. That's 3.
Well, today science is hard at work proving something else:
Proving the existence of ancient settlements, structures, and artifacts that served as backdrop for the stories of the Bible! Amazing.
About as relevant as archeologist thousands of years from now discovering the Globe Theater, but in doing so, they do nothing to establish that Hamlet, Romeo or Othello ever existed anywhere other than Shakespeare's mind.
It always amuses me in a sad way to hear today's sorry collection of atheists, seculars, humanists and other assorted moonbats slam the Bible and it's content and its long-deceased writers. These people, of course, then turn around and fall on their knees worshipping their "gods," science, politics and sociology (preferably in relationship to their love of socialism and "one world").
Modern day "literary critics" they are, panning the school of writers of 2-3,000 years ago (when actual writing things down was just beginning to catch on and take over from tribal storytellers). How assured, and haughty and superior they sound. It was a totally different planet and world back then, with different people and beliefs and cultures and languages. It has no relationship with this country's "modern" smug technocrats and shallow "American Idol" and "hip-hop" culture, and those people who worship and bend over for the Great God Science. They are gaga over their assertion that their science(s) "prove" everything. So by false analogy this then proves all their precious rationalizations and intellectualizations.
How sad.
Well, today science is hard at work proving something else:
I typed into Google and got this:
Results 1 - 10 of about 902,000 for biblicalarchaeology.
The facts are that these days this field is really coming to fruition. More and more facts are being uncovered which back-up and/or verify the Biblical accounts of the history of their time periods. Every week the History Channel and the National Geographic channel are broadcasting recent accounts of this branch of archaeology.
The speed has been slow but is picking up. Archaeology is by its nature slow and painstaking, and then much analyzation and interpretation of the results must make the rounds. But much of these results are revelatory in understanding how these ancients lived. BTW, this also applies to the ancient Egyptians, their language(s) and their culture, their thoughts and belief systems. Their histories back-up the Old Testament (even the Quran backs up The Old and New Testaments).
It is all on-going with new discoveries almost weekly. But people who post threads like this continually ignore this. Perhaps they are aware of it but try to ignore it. After all, proving Biblical history goes against every lie their libby-lefty professors told them, over and over and over, until they took it as some kind of (warped and distorted) "gospel."
Y'all have a nice day.
>> Wow, you sure think you know a lot about 'all of us'. But, you are wrong about many of us, we do not all fit in your one tidy basket. I do not even consider myself an atheist, and I am the one that started this thread.
As the quote below points out, and I pretty much agree with, 'Fiction' is probably not the best descriptor. I do beleive that certain things in the Bible are probably true, but it is not the infallible word of god.
I chose the title because a moderater deleted one of my post because of those words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn
Some parts of the Bible may contain some accurate historical facts. However, much of the OT was written during the Babylonian Captivity of the Israelites. The Israelites felt oppressed during the captivity so the portion of the Bible they wrote had a heroic slant to their characters. Much of the OT is also a competition of the Hebrew’s God with that of other Gods, man’s projection of who/what God is, and Mans’ limited view of the world during those times.
The Bible may not be completely fiction but it is not completely the inspired, inerrant word of God either.
It is fascinating that so many people defend a book that was written by second or third party "witnesses" to the supposed author of the teachings. It is also amazing that so many who defend it do so with little or no proof of the efficacy of its origin.
I agree with the post by "Reads2Much"... a single word edited completely alters the original meaning. And since the "original" meaning or "truth" wasn't even written by "Jesus" himself...
I also agree with the OP, it easily falls into the realm of Fictional. Albeit, a fiction that has taken on a reality that inspires war among nations, feuds with neighbors, and fanatical wingnuts doing and saying whatever it takes to defend their belief system from rational critiques.
And oh yea, there are lions, tigers, and bears in the Wizard of Oz, and at the end of the yellow brick road, the Great Oz is a nothing more than an ordinary man pretending to have extraordinary powers.
Because a person does not agree with a "book written, translated, edited, and interpreted" by other men does not an atheist make... it just means we have functioning brains not so easily swayed by those who think they are in the know. JMHO.
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.
