RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Kedikat -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 4:52:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: indybbwsubbie

You said that You didn't want so much as a debate on it.  my feeling is that one should accept those comments for the validity on their own - and rejoice in all of our uniqueness.  While i don't necessarily believe as the pagans and wiccans agnostics and others so - i can stand for what i believe in without tearing down or questioning the intergrity of others' beliefs.  IMHO - that makes me the type of Christian that Jesus wants me to be - kind, and accepting - tolerant of others.  And from that standpoint - we can all learn from each other.

There is a big difference in the way you quoted me about debate, than what I actually said.
" You said that You didn't want so much as a debate on it "  Says I will not tolerate debate. That is not what I said. I will debate. But it isn't the particular intent of my questions.  And you really didn't answer any of the questions. And am I being intolerant? How? By mearly asking some questions?
I am asking, about peoples historical and factual knowledge about aspects of a particular religious text that they might be following. If I knew more of another religious text, I might ask of that one as well. The bible has been more directly in my life and society though.
Have I torn down the beliefs in this thread? I have stated mine. And commented on the biblical, both in praise of it and questioning it.



Kedikat -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:05:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: indybbwsubbie

You said that You didn't want so much as a debate on it.  my feeling is that one should accept those comments for the validity on their own - and rejoice in all of our uniqueness.  While i don't necessarily believe as the pagans and wiccans agnostics and others so - i can stand for what i believe in without tearing down or questioning the intergrity of others' beliefs.  IMHO - that makes me the type of Christian that Jesus wants me to be - kind, and accepting - tolerant of others.  And from that standpoint - we can all learn from each other.


This is my problem with the new testament. What Jesus said is all too often what other people said he said. This is true of many others such as Socrates but Socrates through Plato gave us a way of thinking, not a way of behaving. Though one could argue through thought, a way of behaving I guess. 


It would be wonderful to have Jesus's words penned in his own hand and signed. Personally, I think it is the best of the bible. Second hand is so often tainted by interpratation. I find so much of the old and new testament to be pure common sense and decency, and guidlines for living together well. But there are historical parts that are melded into being the word and the way, that are jarringly at odds when taken that way. And other parts that fit the times, but have been outdated by knowledge and society in general. Refridgerators and health codes have made many old testament taboos obsolete.



leakylee -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:11:41 AM)

The hard thing to understand about the Bible is that so much of the dogma and interputations have been decided by man. (If you ever get bored and get a chance at a biblical lit class, it is amazing) I liked it so much I kept my text book. At the council of Nicea (please don't beat me on that spelling), they debated the essence of Christ. Man determined the concept of the Holy Trinity. There were numerous views put forth, but that was the one that won out. There are gospels that were determined to be uninspired, and there for not worthy of being in the cannon. At least one of them telling of Jesus as a child and in the Koran. It has been determined that none of the gospels credited to the apostles, and all of them were written at least 40 year after Christ's death. Just some of the worthless stuff the shove in the head for exams..hehe..

The Bible is full of contradictions, but at the same time the messages and teachings have a lot of value.

love and light
lee




maybemaybenot -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:23:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat


Do you think the bible is the word of God? Or a collection of peoples histories and parables?

I belive and was taught that the Bible is the INSPIRED word of God, not the actual word of God. This given as it was written by man, and mans accounting of events.
Yes, I believe it is a first person accounting on history. Some stories may be parables, I am sure. It is something that I do not put alot of thought into.

Are you aware of how the bible was put together?
I am not an expert, but have a general knowledge of how it was put together.

Are you aware there are other versions?
Yes.

Do you consider it infallable?
I belive God is infallable. The Bible is written by man, so in that sense I would have to say the Bible is not infallable.

How do you reconcile what you know of the bible, with a faith in it?

My faith is in God and in Jesus Chist as my savior. The Bible is my roadmap and guide to that faith. My faith comes from a personal relationship with God, not from the Bible. Albeit that the Bible certainly is one of the foundations from which my faith comes.

What are your worst conflicts with biblical writings/laws, and how do you deal with them?

I do not have any conflicts with Biblical writings. I accept them as they are and for what they are worth and how they can be incorporated into my life.

I am an aetheist. But I am interested. It has a huge effect on our world.


I consider myself a Christian and suspect you will get differing views from mine from different Christians. In general I do not get into threads that revolve around Christianity as they tend to turn ugly.
I hope my answers provide one aspect of thoughts regarding your questions. I do not speak on behalf of any other Christian or denomination of Christians. My beliefs are based on my own God given free will and power of reason, and my personal relationship with God, as I know him.
 
                        mbmbn



Kedikat -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:27:06 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: leakylee

The hard thing to understand about the Bible is that so much of the dogma and interputations have been decided by man. (If you ever get bored and get a chance at a biblical lit class, it is amazing) I liked it so much I kept my text book. At the council of Nicea (please don't beat me on that spelling), they debated the essence of Christ. Man determined the concept of the Holy Trinity. There were numerous views put forth, but that was the one that won out. There are gospels that were determined to be uninspired, and there for not worthy of being in the cannon. At least one of them telling of Jesus as a child and in the Koran. It has been determined that none of the gospels credited to the apostles, and all of them were written at least 40 year after Christ's death. Just some of the worthless stuff the shove in the head for exams..hehe..

The Bible is full of contradictions, but at the same time the messages and teachings have a lot of value.

love and light
lee



Now that is more along the lines of what I intended. What you know of various aspects of the construction of the bible.
Would you say you are a christian? ( This not holding you to any particular level of biblical belief )
If you are. What major conflicts, if any ( considering your knowledge of it ) are there for you?
There are so many levels of belief, that some can deal with the conflicts more easily. But those that take the bible as the infallible law of god have more conflict.



maybemaybenot -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:31:07 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat


Do you think the bible is the word of God? Or a collection of peoples histories and parables?

I believe and was taught that the Bible is the INSPIRED word of God, not the actual word of God. This given as it was written by man, and mans accounting of events. Yes, I believe it is a first person accounting of history. As with any first hand accounting of history, it is possible that it is biased or seen differently by the same people witnessing the same event. Some stories may be parables, I am sure. It is something that I do not put alot of thought into.

Are you aware of how the bible was put together?
I am not an expert, but have a general knowledge of how it was put together.

Are you aware there are other versions?
Yes.

Do you consider it infallable?
I believe God is infallable. The Bible is written by man, so in that sense I would have to say the Bible is not infallable.

How do you reconcile what you know of the bible, with a faith in it?

My faith is in God and in Jesus Chist as my savior. The Bible is my roadmap and guide to that faith. My faith comes from a personal relationship with God, not from the Bible. Albeit that the Bible certainly is one of the foundations from which my faith comes.

What are your worst conflicts with biblical writings/laws, and how do you deal with them?

I do not have any conflicts with Biblical writings. I accept them as they are and for what they are worth and how they can be incorporated into my life.

I am an aetheist. But I am interested. It has a huge effect on our world.


I consider myself a Christian and suspect you will get differing views from mine from different Christians. In general I do not get into threads that revolve around Christianity as they tend to turn ugly.
I hope my answers provide one aspect of thoughts regarding your questions. I do not speak on behalf of any other Christian or denomination of Christians. My beliefs are based on my own God given free will and power of reason, and my personal relationship with God, as I know him.
 
                        mbmbn



Kedikat -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:38:13 AM)

To answer some of my own questions.
I know a fair amount of how the bible was put together.
But I am not religious. I see many common sense and beautiful concepts in the bible and other religious texts. As well as Aesops fables, Mother Goose and the brothers Grimm.
That I do not believe the bible to be the all encompassing laws of life, it causes me no conflicts in itself.
But that I do not live up to it's best ideals, and many other best ideals realised by many others both religious and non, and my own best ideals does cause me conflict.
The conflict is real though. And I can see solutions in reality. I might not attain them, but they exist. For me they are defined in my present and it's realities. Not a whole lot more clear than an ancient religious text concepts, but a bit clearer and relevant to me.



Kedikat -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 5:56:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: maybemaybenot



quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat


Do you think the bible is the word of God? Or a collection of peoples histories and parables?

I belive and was taught that the Bible is the INSPIRED word of God, not the actual word of God. This given as it was written by man, and mans accounting of events. Yes, I believe it is a first person accounting on history. As with any first hand accounting of history, it is possible that is biased or seen differently by the same people witnessing the event. Some stories may be parables, I am sure. It is something that I do not put alot of thought into.

Are you aware of how the bible was put together?
I am not an expert, but have a general knowledge of how it was put together.

Are you aware there are other versions?
Yes.

Do you consider it infallable?
I belive God is infallable. The Bible is written by man, so in that sense I would have to say the Bible is not infallable.

How do you reconcile what you know of the bible, with a faith in it?

My faith is in God and in Jesus Chist as my savior. The Bible is my roadmap and guide to that faith. My faith comes from a personal relationship with God, not from the Bible. Albeit that the Bible certainly is one of the foundations from which my faith comes.

What are your worst conflicts with biblical writings/laws, and how do you deal with them?

I do not have any conflicts with Biblical writings. I accept them as they are and for what they are worth and how they can be incorporated into my life.

I am an aetheist. But I am interested. It has a huge effect on our world.


I consider myself a Christian and suspect you will get differing views from mine from different Christians. In general I do not get into threads that revolve around Christianity as they tend to turn ugly.
I hope my answers provide one aspect of thoughts regarding your questions. I do not speak on behalf of any other Christian or denomination of Christians. My beliefs are based on my own God given free will and power of reason, and my personal relationship with God, as I know him.
 
                        mbmbn



Thankyou.
I found that very interesting. And I like the balance you have found. Of course I expect different ideas from everyone, christian or not. I would not take your views to represent all christians, but it is an insight to you that you took the time to state that. In my opinion only,  that you can state you have no conflicts with the bible, is due to the way you accept it. Like it is the seed of your faith, not the whole of it ?
I am glad you responded. I hope the thread does not turn ugly.
Occasionally, I do lash out at religion, in spite of my gut feelings of some of it's beauty. It is the practice of it that I revile at times. Not the core of it.

A question to you.
If the bible did not exist. Christianity did not exist. Do you think, you would have found your " faith " anyway? Does it exist in you in some way apart from anything?
In a way, my so called faith does.



nightphoenix -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 8:20:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat

King James did not " Translate " the bible. It had been translated many times before. He told a bunch of guys to gather and edit various versions of biblical texts, to suit his ideas/needs. No doubt some additional translation occured. But they knew who was in charge of the chopping block and his desires. God would forgive them.



Not enough time at the moment (At work) to pick apart most of the post, but wanted to clarify one thing - The writings chosen for the Bible had been chosen long, long, long, long before King James, the Old Testament was practically set in stone before the coming of Jesus, and the New Testament was pretty well set in stone well before the Council of Nicea.  King James didn't pick apart, edit, anything, he largely translated it from Latin (Something the Roman Catholic Church was guilty of was forcing the Bible to only be written in Latin, which kept many from being able to read it)...with the Latin of course previously translated from Hebrew and Greek.

As far as the Dead/Spiritually dead thing, I thought that was pretty basic, God told Adam that if he ate the fruit, he would die that day...and Adam did.  It wasn't a physical death, because Adam was around on the earth for like 900 years, it was a spiritual death.  Thus God set in motion a plan to fix Adam's mistake...I don't know where you got that I implied the Old Testament was flawed, or that God was imperfect, or anything like that, I said nothing of the sort.



zumala -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 8:42:56 AM)

I don't have time for a long post right this second, but this is a book I looked at seriously when I was younger.
 
Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.  I believe they've put out a second edition since I was a teen.  Something like The NEW Evidence That Demands a Verdict.  Hopefully that's something useful to start with.  [:)]
 
zuma



darkinshadows -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 8:44:51 AM)

quote:

I'm curious.
Do you think the bible is the word of God? Or a collection of peoples histories and parables?


It is all of these.

quote:

Are you aware of how the bible was put together?


Yes

quote:

Are you aware there are other versions?


In a way, yes.  Although I would not call them versions, rather interpretations and different languages.

quote:

Do you consider it infallable?


If one believes in the word of God to be infallable, then yes.

quote:

How do you reconcile what you know of the bible, with a faith in it?


My faith has nothing to do with the bible.  It has to do with God.

quote:

What are your worst conflicts with biblical writings/laws, and how do you deal with them?


My disappointment at the mistreatment of the original texts and humans ability to make up words to fit their own agenda, instead of remain true to the original texts and all the books that exist.

and yes, I am a christian.  I believe in the trinity.  I believe in Gods Love and that Love is the core of the bible.
I also firmly believe that BDSM melds quite beautifully with my faith and my belief.
 
Peace and Rapture.



meatcleaver -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 8:50:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: zumala

  Hopefully that's something useful to start with.  [:)]
 
zuma


This too http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/

I hadn't heard of the book so I googled it.



darkinshadows -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 8:53:41 AM)

quote:

A question to you.
If the bible did not exist. Christianity did not exist. Do you think, you would have found your " faith " anyway? Does it exist in you in some way apart from anything?
In a way, my so called faith does.

I know this was not to me, but I have the desire to respond.
Christianity does not exist because of the bible.  If the bible did not exist, if the words were not written down, then the teachings would be passed on a differnet way. Christianity exists because of the existance of christ.  It is a system of beliefs based on the teachings of Jesus. The bible, technically, has nothing to do with christianity.
 
Peace and Rapture



zumala -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 9:01:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: zumala

  Hopefully that's something useful to start with.  [:)]
 
zuma


This too http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/

I hadn't heard of the book so I googled it.


I just glanced at the website.  Looks like an arguement against the book.  Which I'm sure some will be interested in.  It probably helps if a person were to read the book themselves first, though.  Sort of like it helps to read the Bible yourself first before you allow people to tell you what it is or isn't.
 
zuma



ArtCatDom -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 9:03:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat

I'm curious.
Do you think the bible is the word of God? Or a collection of peoples histories and parables?
Are you aware of how the bible was put together?
Are you aware there are other versions?
Do you consider it infallable?
How do you reconcile what you know of the bible, with a faith in it?
What are your worst conflicts with biblical writings/laws, and how do you deal with them?
I am an aetheist. But I am interested. It has a huge effect on our world.
There is a reflection of nonreligious folks with conflicts with the law/society and biblical followers and it's complex laws/society.
Please keep the flames to a minimum, and civil.


I feel that the Bible is both a collection of the Creator's inspiration and a collection of history & parables. (I'm very reluctant to place the phrase "God's word" on it, though I believe in the inspiration of most scriptures.)

I am very familiar with the history of the Bible, both from the point of view of "who wrote it" as well as "how was it compiled".

Hmmmm, can you be more clear what you mean by "other versions"? Most Biblical texts are fairly consistant in content and wording across a ridiculous period of time. So if you're implying there are radically differant versions of say the Gospel of Matthew extnat, I would disagree. If you mean texts outside of the "canon", then absolutely, since I accept the Gospel of Thomas as scriptural. If you mean differant canons, then again absolutely, since I was raised and confirmed Roman Catholic and that Bible has books not in the Bible canon most people are familiar with.

It is absolutely not infallible. It was penned by men through inspiration. Besides just the fact that the inspiration is filtered through the subjective lens of those writers' minds, those authors were not compelled to set aside their own beliefs/prejudices to listen entirely to the inspiration. (It has been often said free will is a bitch.)

I reconcile what I know of the Bible with my faith in it (and other scriptures) by acknowledging the very human limitations mentioned above.

My beliefs come into conflict mainly with assertions that Jesus is THE God (I'm a unitarian and deny this). Also I come into conflict with the convoluted legal codes of Paul and the Old Testament. The former is relatively easy to overcome since the words of Jesus as we have them show an association made with Jesus as Creator, yet he explains that "mystery" and repeatedly denies that he and the "Father" are synonymous. As far as the Old Testament, it shows obvious signs of heavy redaction and nationalistic rewrites so it is not difficult to discount much of it. As for Paul, there are two main rationalizations for parting ways with Pauline Christianity. First, much of Paul's work is obviously written by differant writers. Second, Paul was a Pharisee (a legalist) and my above stated beliefs about inspiration allow easy discounting of his legalisms.

Just remember though, I'm a filthy filthy heretic. I'm a literal unitarian (montheist, denies Godhood of Christ) and universalist (believes in universal salvation). I also have some folk faith and gnostic tendancies (belief in charms, belief in natural spirits, belief in continuing revelation, belief that anyone can be inspired by the Holy Ghost if they open themsleves).

*meow*



darkinshadows -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 10:34:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat

Deep breath.....
So...Back to my thread origin. Not so much, is the bible right/real/etc..... But how much do you know about what you belive of the bible. And how do any conflicts affect you?


If one has faith, then there is no conflict.
But there is a difference between having blind faith, and faith.
 
When you have faith, it is a gift that you have that allows you, as a disciple, to test and to examine for yourself.  Belief in Jesus, or God or the Holy Spirit isn't and shouldn't be vicarious.  As a christian, I can't just turn up (metaphorically) at the pearly gates and claim I have a right to enter, just because I thought Jesus existed.  I have to know and understand and be at peace with my choices and my own decisions.  Saying I am a christian and that because I believe in Jesus and that He died for my sins, doesn't get me a free pass into the fathers presence.  I have to understand/accept it and Him (subject to my personal abilities).
It isnt about knowing the bible - it is about testing and learning... about making mistakes and understanding those mistakes and moving on with that lesson I have learnt in mind - so that I do not make the same mstake.  It is about being responsible for my own actions.  It is about being loved and about loving.  It is understanding and acceptance even when the understanding fails me.
 
Many people view christianity as a dry region based on what they see as dubious texts and ceremonial traditions.  And in part, it is... however christianity goes beyond simple text and teachings.  It is a relationship with a living God.
 
It is about the Love and Patience, Trust and undeniable Faith God has in and for me.  And visa versa.
 
Funny, kinda sounding like a BDSM relationship there...[:D](had to slip that in....)
 
Peace and Rapture



pup75 -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 10:45:22 AM)


Here are some things I struggle with an inability to resolve as a born again Christian.

In 2006, experts struggle with and are often unable to accurately translate original documents from Spanish to English that are only 250 years old. But we believe translators in 1611 were able to accurately interpret much older documents with any more success? In 1611, the book of Job may have been over 3500 years old; today it may be over 4000 years old. The Bible is being translated by non-native speakers from copies of copies of copies of ancient languages. These translators have far more obstacles to accuracy than our experts simply trying to understand the Spanish equivalent of Shakesperean English.

Furthermore, how sure are we that none of these translators, medieval or modern, are influenced by their own beliefs, the desires of their employers, or social or political pressures? A short observation of today's religious right and their unchaste association with corporate powermongers plainly shows how easily corruptible even well-meaning Christians can be.

Using that as a jumping-off point to the next topic, if modern Christians insist on using 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 to condemn homosexuals to hell, do they not realize that the same passage condemns the greedy to the same fate? Why do they target one and sleep with the other? During his time embodied in flesh, I never read of Jesus assailing a gay man or lesbian for their sexuality. However, John 2:13-16, Matthew 21:12-13, Mark 11:15-18, and Luke 19:45-47 -- all four Gospels -- record him picking up a whip, turning over tables, and driving away moneychangers whose greed drove a wedge between the faithful and their God. I challenge the religious right and their megachurches to make an acceptable account for their behavior in light of this.

History, human nature, and hypocrisy have led me to a point where at the very best, I believe a tremendous amount of faith is necessary to be certain of the Bible's authenticity. I believe and want to believe in God and Christ, and that Christ's death on the cross was meant to be an atonement for all the sins of whomever would accept such a sacrifice in their place. I am, however, left questioning which parts of the Bible are trustworthy. For me, that is frighteningly unsettling, for it makes questionable the foundation of the entire belief system.

The best answer I have come up with to satisfy what I believe is the nature of God is that we should love God with everything we are, love others as we love ourselves, and behave toward others the way we want them to behave toward us -- the Bible's first, second, and greatest commandments. And in that vein, I would find it far more righteous to offer respect, dignity and decency to a gay couple trying to raise a child together, than to a greedy shill who claims Christianity while backing laws and behaviors that victimize others.

In the end, I may be entirely wrong. I am not entirely satisfied with my own answers, but neither am I satisfied with the behavior of the modern Church.

Sincerely,

pup75



darkinshadows -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 11:12:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pup75


Here are some things I struggle with an inability to resolve as a born again Christian.


Using that as a jumping-off point to the next topic, if modern Christians insist on using 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 to condemn homosexuals to hell, do they not realize that the same passage condemns the greedy to the same fate? Why do they target one and sleep with the other? During his time embodied in flesh, I never read of Jesus assailing a gay man or lesbian for their sexuality. However, John 2:13-16, Matthew 21:12-13, Mark 11:15-18, and Luke 19:45-47 -- all four Gospels -- record him picking up a whip, turning over tables, and driving away moneychangers whose greed drove a wedge between the faithful and their God. I challenge the religious right and their megachurches to make an acceptable account for their behavior in light of this.

History, human nature, and hypocrisy have led me to a point where at the very best, I believe a tremendous amount of faith is necessary to be certain of the Bible's authenticity. I believe and want to believe in God and Christ, and that Christ's death on the cross was meant to be an atonement for all the sins of whomever would accept such a sacrifice in their place. I am, however, left questioning which parts of the Bible are trustworthy. For me, that is frighteningly unsettling, for it makes questionable the foundation of the entire belief system.

The best answer I have come up with to satisfy what I believe is the nature of God is that we should love God with everything we are, love others as we love ourselves, and behave toward others the way we want them to behave toward us -- the Bible's first, second, and greatest commandments. And in that vein, I would find it far more righteous to offer respect, dignity and decency to a gay couple trying to raise a child together, than to a greedy shill who claims Christianity while backing laws and behaviors that victimize others.

In the end, I may be entirely wrong. I am not entirely satisfied with my own answers, but neither am I satisfied with the behavior of the modern Church.

Sincerely,

pup75

In the original greek text, homosexuality is misinterpreted within the NT...where is is mentioned - that word actually doesn't exist...(I did a huge post on this last year - don't know if it still exists and I will try and find it for you or maybe Em or proud know it ) When condemming homosexuality within the NT - it is done so without taking previous texts into consideration and is a total misrepresentation of the teachings of Christ.  And as christians are 'disciples of Jesus and His teachings - and believers of God and the HolySpirit'... to misrepresent Jesus' words and condem Homosexual practise is technically heresy.... Paul clearly taught that the old law(OT) was brought into completion through Christ.  Therefore it is actually against the teachings of Christ to condemn homosexuality.  In fact, Jesus cured and showed love to a homosexual in Matthew...Jesus also stated that marriage was blessed by God, but acknowledged that it was not for everyone.
 
Peace and Love
 
*just edit to add that when Jesus cured the young man, he didn't cure him of his homosexuality (before anyone jumps on that bandwagon) - rather cured his paralasys...



meatcleaver -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 11:24:48 AM)

The stories of the bible might well be 3,500 - 4,000 years old but they were written down approx 2,300 years ago. That gives a good 1200 years for such stories to change and we know stories in oral tradition do change with political circumstance and fashion.

The gospels don't agree on key facts and none were written contemporary to Jesus. It is like people today writing down stories of WWII from stories passed onto us by our fathers and grandfathers. Now what sort of  history other than mythic history can come out of that? Especially when the people writing such stories had a preconceived view that Jesus was the messiah and their god was the only god. Hardly the stuff for objective story telling.

If you want to see some spiritual significance in the bible you can find spiritual significance in the Ilyiad, Odyses and Beowulf. and the Nordic Sagas which are just as legitimate historical and spiritual tracts as the bible. And since the traditional western image portrayed of Jesus is that of Zeus, much ritual surrounding Christianity is pre-Christian Roman. One is left with a mish-mash religion that doesn't stand together under scrutiny. You simply believe it through blind faith or dump it.



Saraheli -> RE: Biblical question to Biblical followers (6/1/2006 11:39:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat

I'm curious.
Do you think the bible is the word of God? Or a collection of peoples histories and parables?
Are you aware of how the bible was put together?
Are you aware there are other versions?
Do you consider it infallable?
How do you reconcile what you know of the bible, with a faith in it?
What are your worst conflicts with biblical writings/laws, and how do you deal with them?
I am an aetheist. But I am interested. It has a huge effect on our world.
There is a reflection of nonreligious folks with conflicts with the law/society and biblical followers and it's complex laws/society.
Please keep the flames to a minimum, and civil.


I think the bible is a history written by the Hebrews. 
As to how it was put together, a group of Greek Bishops got together and decided which books were good enough to be included.
Of course there are other versions, the Coptic Christians have a bible with different books, as do the Ethiopians, Armenians, Kurds, and the Nestorians.
No I do not consider the bible infallable.  Since I believe that the bible was made of the histories of the Hebrews, it can't be infallable.  When one writes histories, there is always a personal bias put in.  Also, since it was translated, the translator would be able to spin his own bias into it.
I don't have faith in the bible, beyond that which  I would put into any ancient history. 
I don't have any conflicts with the bible's writings, because I don't recognize them as divince instruction. 
My beliefs are a mixture a Paganism, Shamanism, and probably others.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.298828E-02