The Bible
Grendel
All that is fear... Join Date: 2002-07-19 Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
All that is fear... Join Date: 2002-07-19 Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
<div class="IPBDescription">It says [b]what[/b]?</div> Hahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahhaha.
Excuse me.
<i>Grendel wipes a tear from his eye.</i>
The word <b>nice</b> has enjoyed over 20 different meanings, some of which are diametrically opposed, in the last 500 years.
People frequently quote a 2000 year old anthology, which (if true) was spoken in variety of local dialects, then written in a variety of greek and Aramaic dialects, then translated through Aramaic, Hewbrew, Greek, Latin, French, Old English, Norman English, Modern English and revised at the request of several different kings.
These people then quote text from this <b>as the literal or even vaguely accurate representation of the word of God</b>?
Even if the original text was word for word unequivocally a perfect record of events and dialogue, there isn't any remote possibility that the current contents of the bible are even close to the original.
People who believe in the bible literally - guess what, you've been owned by reality.
We can't even guess what Jane Austen meant by the phrase:
"Thank you for the nice, long letter you wrote me" less than <b>300 years ago</b>. Yet people persist in supporting their arguments with quotes from the bible...
Faith is one thing. Willful retardedness is something entirely different. Quoting from the bible undermines your argument.
Discuss.
Excuse me.
<i>Grendel wipes a tear from his eye.</i>
The word <b>nice</b> has enjoyed over 20 different meanings, some of which are diametrically opposed, in the last 500 years.
People frequently quote a 2000 year old anthology, which (if true) was spoken in variety of local dialects, then written in a variety of greek and Aramaic dialects, then translated through Aramaic, Hewbrew, Greek, Latin, French, Old English, Norman English, Modern English and revised at the request of several different kings.
These people then quote text from this <b>as the literal or even vaguely accurate representation of the word of God</b>?
Even if the original text was word for word unequivocally a perfect record of events and dialogue, there isn't any remote possibility that the current contents of the bible are even close to the original.
People who believe in the bible literally - guess what, you've been owned by reality.
We can't even guess what Jane Austen meant by the phrase:
"Thank you for the nice, long letter you wrote me" less than <b>300 years ago</b>. Yet people persist in supporting their arguments with quotes from the bible...
Faith is one thing. Willful retardedness is something entirely different. Quoting from the bible undermines your argument.
Discuss.
Comments
If I don't end up doing it, and it ends up being true, I get to spend...ever...in hell.
My parents are so strict*
* They force us to go to church...if we refuse, we get grounded. From everything. My parents suck...
So yeah I've heard that the bible went through all this stuff. And since it's true and all, I feel better...about life. But, then again, who knows. I'm afraid <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Not only you, but countless milllions of people who follow religious texts word for word?
However, disreguarding that the basic "Golden rule" of love yourself and your neighboors is probably the best moral code to live by. It, of course, has been taught for many more years then the bible has been around though.
In addition, when parents force a religion upon their children after they have proved to them to be very self-aware that is probably the greatest sin I have ever seen commited. I'm not even talking about sin in the biblical sense either.
You have my sympathy Noslinker.
Not only you, but countless milllions of people who follow religious texts word for word? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Christianity, and possibly other religions as well, has an out for this. The overiding christian ideal is that by asking for forgivness and accepting christ as having died for your sins, you will go to heaven anyway. There seems to be some debate as to wether or not you really accept christ if you continue to knowingly commit sins, but in the case presented this wouldn't matter since you wouldn't know they were sins.
In short, the Christian God gives As for effort.
Of course, if this ideal happened to arise because one of those mistranslations, then there could be trouble.
Cyndane = <b><i>win</i></b>
The Bible is a book full of stories that (fictional or not) are not meant to be translated literally. Rather they are stories with good underlying meanings such as "love thy neighbor", "give charitably to others", and "live virtuously".
Yes but therein lies the problem, because a large number of people ether do not understand this, or do and simply refuse to acknowledge it out of self-induced ignorance.
A line has to be drawn when concerning what beliefs to “respect” or not, and people who take the bible literally are on the wrong end of that line, therefore I can not respect their absurd beliefs.
The nice thing is none of them can criticize me for saying that because they have the same stance concerning homosexuals.
Because as we all know, the one true God in all his infinite mercy and wisdom loves to play a biblical game of smear the queer.
That would be true, if people lived in a causative vacuum. But we don't.
The current legal and value system that we in the West are <b>all</b> are expected to abide by is derived from Christianity. Furthermore, people constantly lobby for change based on this text and their "interpretation" of it.
If people kept it as their business, that would be fine. But the bible isn't just a personal system of beliefs, it's a set of rules that people are actively encouraged to propagate. I'm kind of staggered that this needs pointing out.
The issue is that
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendal+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendal)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Faith is one thing. Willful retardedness is something entirely different. Quoting from the bible undermines your argument.
Discuss.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can see why you'd want people to give reasons/justifications other than reciting bible text. I agree with that. If a source requires faith to be useful, then I might as well recite passages from Noddy to support my argument.
I'm just wondering why religion comes up so often in these forums. What Marine01 or Skulkbait believe makes no difference to my life, and they're not going to change their views. Why bother butting heads?
The issue is that
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendal+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendal)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Faith is one thing. Willful retardedness is something entirely different. Quoting from the bible undermines your argument.
Discuss.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can see why you'd want people to give reasons/justifications other than reciting bible text. I agree with that. If a source requires faith to be useful, then I might as well recite passages from Noddy to support my argument.
I'm just wondering why religion comes up so often in these forums. What Marine01 or Skulkbait believe makes no difference to my life, and they're not going to change their views. Why bother butting heads? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Snidley I believe that both of those two, among others are looking for answers, problem is they keep finding them in totally different sources that do are not compatible.
Therein lies the problem and why there is head butting. Because there are so many different ways to find a "truth" about something and many times both "truths" contradict each other according to what one believes.
I would have to agree with Grendel, if this was a vacuum and all outside ideas were sucked out it would be much easier to get along, or if those who believe in christianity, buddism, hinduism, and etc would leave it out of day to day life many of the conflicts today would have never occured.
One thing interesting about the Bible is that despite the dozens of authors who have taken part in writing it, there are relatively few loopholes. Before you laugh hysterically and point out various loopholes, keep in mind that some supposedly high-quality movies have more plot holes than the Bible does. You've at least gotta wonder how so many people managed to write about even vaguely the same subject and have the books mesh together fairly well across years of writing.
Well, I think about this, and I factor in the fact that I believe in God (no, this isn't a discussion about God's existence... yet), and I think some more. Well, where is a good place to start? Three major religions- Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, are closely related by looking at their shared scripture. While Judaism only regards the Old Testament as holy, Christians draw from it as well as the New Testament. Islam holds both Testaments in high regard, with the Koran as the final authority. Well, I started my religious endeavor years ago by studying the Old Testament.
It was written by people. They're supposed to be divinely inspired. However, has anybody heard of a perfect human who wasn't really God? If these guys weren't God incarnate, then I wouldn't be suprised to see them abuse their power. There are a few passages in the Old Testament that seem rather out of place, such as an arbitrary ban on clothes woven from multiple threads. So, what is there to garner from the Old Testament if, indeed, the words of God have been mucked up by the human authors? Well, it can't be too bad: there's still the underlying moral code, the Ten Commandments, and the overall message of God's will for the people.
Then there's the New Testament. The New Testament seems to be the arrival of the Messiah, though in a very non-militaristic form, which confuses the Jews and lures them away from him. The New Testament really is a moral code that more people should follow: the salvation of man will come in the forgiving of sins and reconcilliation with enemies. The world would be so peaceful if human pride did not step in and demand vengeance. But what about the perversion of mortal writers? Could they be messing with our heads, telling us that if we're lazy enough to believe in a loving Messiah that we'll be saved with little effort? Some say that to be a true believer in Christ, one must follow his teachings... "Go, and sin no more." You can't be a true Christian if you sin on Jesus's watch, beacause that means that you really don't believe in him. I tend to lean towards this thought train.
Then, there's the Koran. According to its teachings and extensions by the Islamic community, Jesus was a holy prophet, but not the savior. The savior was Muhammad, a much more militaristic man with a definite agenda. The Five Pillars of Islam seem remeniscent of the Ten Commandments: you're not going to kill other Muslims and such. However, Muhammed is quick to strike down those who turn away from Islam, judging them on their defiance in the face of the truth. His followers were also known for forced conversions. Much of Islamic law is derived from the Sunna and the Hadith: the Hadith being the narrative of Muhammed's life and the Sunna being the way he lived it. I believe that Sunnis lean more towards defining the law code from Muhammed's actions and life. This presents some contradictions. I've heard from a few Muslims that it is perfectly fine to marry "people of the book," Christians and Jews. So, if Muslims can marry Christians and Jews, it must mean that Islam is not synonymous with a sacred quest to kill or convert non-believers. This is just an example: peaceful Muslims (who are very cool people, I kid you not) seem to have a fountain of peace-loving Koran passages to quote, while it's safe to say that Muhammed wasn't the nicest of guys at times.
I still can't make up my mind about Islam. The splits and differences within it present an odd situation for converts, believers, and critics alike.
For now, I'll stick with my own special interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. It has to capture the basic guidelines and facets of the religion without catching weird details like some of the bizzare figments from the Old Testament, or the confusion about some parts of Jesus's life in the New Testament.
Wait... this is the part in my post where I realize that I've gone horribly off on a tangent about three different religions, and I need to bring it back to the topic before I finish my post, or risk looking like a foolish preacher. Um... Oh, yeah.
I tend to agree with Grendel when he says that you can't follow the Bible word for word. After all, in some translations of the Bible, the sixth commandment reads, "Thou shalt not kill." In others, it says "You shall not murder," which leaves some vague wiggle room and uspets some of the easy decisions. I hope that my long rant above has explored some other cases of this, because I'd hate to have written it for nothing.
If I am wrong about hell, I have lost nothing. However, lost friend, if you are wrong about hell, you have lost everything! - Dr. Lee Roberson
Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important. - C.S Lewis
-Dont hit each other
-Be nice
-Try not to be an **** in general
-Worship the thing thats put infront of you <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
One thing that is often over looked is how the Apostles lives were changed. I think most people here would agree that the Christian faith is historical in that we have to study some history to investigate the testimony included in it.
<!--QuoteBegin-More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are many definitions of “history,” but the one I prefer is “a knowledge of the past based upon testimony.” If someone says, “I don’t believe that’s a good definition, “I ask, “Do you b elieve that Napoleon lived?” They almost always reply, “Yes.” “Have you seen him?” I ask, and they confess they haven’t. “How do you know, then?” Well, they are relying on testimony.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First we have to see if this testimony is reliable. We see the Apostles and how they died
<!--QuoteBegin-More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Peter-crucified
Andrew-crucified
Matthew-the sword
John-natural
James, son of Alphaeus-crucified
Simon-crucified
Thaddaeus-killed by arrows
James, brother of Jesus-stoned
Thomas-spear thrust
Bartholomew-crucified
James, son of Zebedee-the sword <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would all these people die for a lie? I think it's fairly safe to reason that these people believed absolutely in what they were preaching. I don't think people would die (especially in some of these ways) if they knew it was a lie). They took great care in recording the events.
<!--QuoteBegin-John 1:7 NIV+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (John 1:7 NIV)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-John 21:24-25 NIV+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (John 21:24-25 NIV)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I supposed that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
After Jesus’ death, the Apostles were afraid and they ran and hide because of their doubts but we find that after the resurrection they were bold even to the point of death in preaching the word. Soon after Christ’s death we see the Apostles preaching boldly about Christ’s resurrection. This kind of boldness even to death doesn’t come from believing in a lie. The Apostles didn’t even give up their convictions when they were being killed. They preached the word till their very end.
<!--QuoteBegin-More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Pascal, the French philosopher, writes: “The allegation that the Apostles were imposters is quite absurd. Let us follow the charge to it’s logical conclusion: Let us picture those twelve men, meeting after the death of Jesus Christ, and entering into a conspiracy to say that he has risen. That would have constituted an attack upon both the civil and the religious authorities. The heart of man is strangely given to fickleness and change; it is swayed by promises, tempted by material things. If any one of those men hand yielded to temptation so alluring, or given way to the more compelling arguments of prison, torture, they would have all been lost.”
“How have they turned almost overnight,” asked Michael Green, “into the indomitable band of enthusiasts who braved opposition, cynicism, ridicule, hardship, prison, and death in those continents, as they preached everywhere Jesus and the resurrection <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I’m not sure how you all will like those explanations so I’ll also include some others.
Bibliographical Test
This is a test of the textual transmission by which the documents reach us. Well compare the number of manuscripts of the New Testament by other ancient sources.
<!--QuoteBegin-More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The history of Thucydides (460-400 BC) is available to us from just eight MSS (manuscripts) dated about AD 900 almost 1300 years after he wrote it. The MSS of the history of Herodotus are likewise late and scares, and yet, as F. F. Bruce concludes, “No classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest manuscripts of their works which are of use to us are over 1300 years later than the originals”
Aristotle wrote his poetics around 343 bc and yet the earliest copy we have is dated AD 1100 nearly a 1,400 year gap and only five MSS are in existence.
Caesar composed his history of the Gallic Wars between 58 and 50 BC and it’s manuscript authority rest on 9 or 10 copies dating 1000 years after his death.
When it comes to the manuscript authority of the New Testament, the abundance of material si almost embarrassing in contrast. After the early papyri manuscript discoveries that bridged the gap between the times of Christ and the second century, an abundance of other MSS came to light. Over 20,000 copies of the New Testament manuscripts are in existence today. The Iliad has 643 MSS and is second in manuscript authority after the New Testament
Sir Frederic Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian at the British Museum and second to none in authority in issuing statements about manuscripts, concludes: “The interval then between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that Scripts have come down to us substantially as they were written has not been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.” <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I haven’t gotten to the Internal Evidence Test or the External Evidence Test but I thought I’d let you all ponder this for a bit.
<b> (His long post, I'm not going to quote it all sorry.) </b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not to nitpick semipsychotic, but hinduism is the 3rd largest religion not judaism, that has actually quite a small following.
In addition, this is not meant to be picking on the bible, but you have to remember, no one now translated the bible currently, was around to grammatically correct old hebrew texts.
Like grendel said the word "nice" has had many many different means in just the past 500 years, who knows what the orginal authors intended.
Disagree all you want, but that is a fact. No one on these forums or who is alive today can honestly say they know what happened and how they meant these to be interpeted at all.
I say leave it as a nice book of morals and call it good. Disreguard the silliness and leave it at that.
*edit* Didn't see your post monkey, but you are using biased views as well. Tsk tsk.
How about a book that isn't written by a christian advocate?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I like that description, looking at it like anyother similar work too.
A book with some simple lessons to live life by.
Like the whole Golden rule concept which can also be found in Confucious' "The Annalects" writian almost 500 years before jesus ever walked the earth.
That rule which Im sure even predated confucious. Just another basic rule that humanity across the various realms of earth seem to in the very least acknoledge.
Looking at it from this way also seems to take away a lot of that "my religion is better than yours/i disagree on you b/c i belive differently" crap that often drives people apart who even though may believe in different things, really have similar overal morals on right and wrong.
Almost all of the main religons of the world believe in or say things about things like charity, inner peace, forgivness, loving your fellow humans etc but these simple core, and generaly universally accepted things often get diluted or passed over when people read to far into things and take things to literally.
How about a book that isn't written by a christian advocate? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
If I'm not mistaken, I'm the only one backing my post up with print and not just posting my own opinions.
I also haven't said anything that would need backing up after all, the bible is open for "interpitation" is it not? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Mar 25 2005, 06:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Mar 25 2005, 06:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->People frequently quote a 2000 year old anthology, which (if true) was spoken in variety of local dialects, then written in a variety of greek and Aramaic dialects, then translated through Aramaic, Hewbrew, Greek, Latin, French, Old English, Norman English, Modern English and revised at the request of several different kings.
These people then quote text from this <b>as the literal or even vaguely accurate representation of the word of God</b>?
Even if the original text was word for word unequivocally a perfect record of events and dialogue, there isn't any remote possibility that the current contents of the bible are even close to the original.
People who believe in the bible literally - guess what, you've been owned by reality.
Faith is one thing. Willful retardedness is something entirely different. Quoting from the bible undermines your argument.
Discuss.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think a major part of this thread is to discuss how accurate the Bible is so I think a requirement would be sources to back it up.
I’m sure that many of you will not like this test but I think it’s an important part of this case
<!--QuoteBegin-More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> One has still to determine whether that written record is credible and to what extent. That is the problem of the internal criticism, which is the second test of historicity listed by C. Sanders.
At this point the literary critic still follows Aristotle’s dictum: “The Benefit of the doubt is to be given to the document itself, and not arrogated by the critic to himself.” In other words, as John W. Montgomery summarizes: “One must listen to the claims of the document under analysis, and not assume fraud or error unless the author disqualified himself by contradictions or know factual inaccuracies.” <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This might be unpleasant for many but I’ll now quote a few verses.
<!--QuoteBegin-Luke 1:1-3+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Luke 1:1-3)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word have handed them down to us, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus.”<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-2 Peter 1:16+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (2 Peter 1:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->”For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.”<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-1 John 1:3+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (1 John 1:3)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->”… what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, that you also may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ.”<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-John 19:35+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (John 19:35)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->”And he who has seen has borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you also may believe.”<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Luke 3:1+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Luke 3:1)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->”Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Phillip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene . . . “<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Bible also talks to people who were eyewitnesses to the accounts who would have been able to refute it off the bat if it wasn’t accurate.
<!--QuoteBegin-Acts 2:22+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Acts 2:22)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as yourselves know. . “<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Acts 26:24-28+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Acts 26:24-28)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->”And while Paul was saying this in his defense, Festus said in a loud voice, ‘Paul, you are out of your mind! Your great learning is driving you mad.’ But Paul said, ‘I am not out of my mind, most excellent Festus, but I utter words of sober truth. For the king knows about these matters, and I speak to him also with confidence, since I am persuaded that none of these things escape his notice; for this has not been done in a corner’”<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (More Than A Carpenter by Josh McDowell)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Concerning the primary-source value of the New Testament records, F.F.Bruce, Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester, says: “And it was not only friendly eyewitnesses that the early preachers had to reckon with; there were others less well disposed who were also conversant with the main facts of the ministry and death of Jesus. The disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts), which would at once be exposed by those who would only be too glad to do so. On the contrary, one of the strong points in the original apostolic preaching is the confident appeal to the knowledge of the hearers; and not only said, ‘We are witness of those things,’ but also, ‘As you yourselves also know’ (Acts 2:22). Had their been any tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a further corrective.”<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I’m somewhat tired after a long day but I’ll try to finish with External Evidence Test in the morning.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
So would that be like
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
vs
Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
or
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven . . . earth . . . water."
vs
Exodus 25:18 "And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
or
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works."
vs
Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them . . . that thine alms may be in secret." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and even still parts of the bible that are of different sections but still seem to conflict.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ezekiel 24:14 "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent."
vs
Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->James 1:13 "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
vs
Genesis 22:1 "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I did a report on this in college a few years ago and I could list about 22 pages of things like this.
Im just curious as how you guys feel about them.
Im just curious as how you guys feel about them. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Are those inconsistancies or different verses taken out of context which actually talk about different things?
I know my answer but I thought I'd let you guys think about that a bit.
Are those inconsistancies or different verses taken out of context which actually talk about different things?
I know my answer but I thought I'd let you guys think about that a bit. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They are both inconsistancies and verses relating to various subjects, anything from killing, stealing, slavery, keeping the sabbath, to smaller things like "should I follow laws.
These qoutes where taken from the King James Version of the Bible.
I used this version b.c many historians conisidered this translation to be one of the most accurate.
Inconsistencies even for trivial types of things too.
Like, did Michal have have any kids?
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->II Samuel 6:23 "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death."
vs.
II Samuel 21:8 "But the king took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul."
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Best translated "Thou shalt not <i>murder</i>"
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 32:27<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Directions given to the Israelites after the lot of them had fallen into idolatry. Execution, not murder.
------------------------
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 20:4 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
NASB Translates "An idol," IE: something set forth for worship.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 25:18<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The two cherub, symbolically used to decorate the ark of the covenant.
<span style='color:white'>--------------
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Show the world that you have God in 'ya by doing good stuff for them
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Matthew 6<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't be boastful about how you give your money, don't do it for your own gain. "2"So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they (B)may be honored by men ©Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full."
</span>------------
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ezekiel 24:14 "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent."
vs
Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>Nice use of the KJV to try and get the effect you want.</b>
Ezekiel : Will not repent from a certain judgement fortold by prophecy.
Genesis: God regrets making man, because they are sinful *******s.
[color = white]-------------
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->James 1:13 "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
vs
Genesis 22:1 "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Tempt in Gen 22 KJV = "Test," Tempt in James 1 means to attempt to lure into sin.
[/color]
I think James Holding of Tektonics Apologetic Ministries said it best: "Whenever you run across any person who criticizes the Bible, claims findings of contradiction or error -- they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. They have to earn it from you."
From <a href='http://www.tektonics.org/af/calcon.html' target='_blank'>here,</a> which goes over just some of the reasons why these sorts of lists are inane. Especially when people like you choose to try and mix and match translations to prove their points.
Next time you try something like this, try looking at <a href='http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html' target='_blank'>Strong's Lexicon.</a>
Fair to say you could parallel that comment up with those that did not follow the Nazi regime, or would not if it came about again, yet they are fascinated by WW2 and the Nazi situation? Okay so that is terribly worded but I'm tired, not long up. Hopefully got the point of that post across, it also seems that people are fascination by things they do not want to be, or have or experience.
[EDIT]I'm one of those people you speak about, with the whole bible/religion thing. I feel it's a fascination in disbelief on how others can put faith in something, yet myself I could never but would probably one day like to be able to.
<!--QuoteBegin-Thaldarin+Mar 26 2005, 04:05 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Thaldarin @ Mar 26 2005, 04:05 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Fair to say you could parallel that comment up with those that did not follow the Nazi regime, or would not if it came about again, yet they are fascinated by WW2 and the Nazi situation? Okay so that is terribly worded but I'm tired, not long up. Hopefully got the point of that post across, it also seems that people are fascination by things they do not want to be, or have or experience.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Cyndande+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cyndande)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Therein lies the problem and why there is head butting. Because there are so many different ways to find a "truth" about something and many times both "truths" contradict each other according to what one believes.
I would have to agree with Grendel, if this was a vacuum and all outside ideas were sucked out it would be much easier to get along, or if those who believe in christianity, buddism, hinduism, and etc would leave it out of day to day life many of the conflicts today would have never occured.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'll address all of these points together.
While it's true that we don't live in a vaccuum, do you really expect anyone to change how they feel due to something over the internet? The bible is important, no doubt - but if you believe it cannot possibly be true, why go over it, again and again? Hell, we already have an open thread discussing the bible!
There are plenty of things around us to talk about that people feel strongly about. Immigration, education, health care, foreign policy... nothing comes up as often as religion, though. I've certainly never seen religion brought up so often in my life, and I spent most of my education in one C of E school or another!
Note that I'm not saying that religion hasn't been important. It has. But we're not really talking about what effect religion has had on history, are we? We're talking about the thing itself, as usual: "Christianity is bunk because its holy text is flawed. Discuss." We won't get into effects on history until someone, at some point, brings up all the ills religion has caused (probably citing the crusades as an example). (:
____
<!--QuoteBegin-Thaldarin+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Thaldarin)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->[EDIT]I'm one of those people you speak about, with the whole bible/religion thing. I feel it's a fascination in disbelief on how others can put faith in something, yet myself I could never but would probably one day like to be able to.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I feel pretty much the same way. I can't believe in Christ or a loving (yet omnipotent/omniscient) God. I have a sort of admiration for people who can put so much faith in something, I must admit. Then again, neither of us are that active in posting on religious threads, IIRC.
____
Is it some need to have "your truth" confirmed? Is it exasperation with people who don't see things your way? Or is there something I'm missing?
But then again, I don't go around forcing the beliefs of the Matrix onto people. Not to mention the Bible is written by people who supposedly had God tell them what to write, rather than the Wachowski's. If the bible is true, I think it'd be expected that God would be able to cover more loopholes than the Wachowski's :|.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Best translated "Thou shalt not <i>murder</i>"
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, no it is not. At least not from what I've seen. IIRC someone even wrote a whole thing about this in a similar discussion some time ago, stating that the hebrew word used was equivelent to "kill" but only applied to humans. By using the term "murder" you imply that killing someone, if there is legal grounds to do so, is acceptable. I submit to you that if you believe that God is ok with the state sanctioned killing of people, then you've totally missed something. I mean, after all, if the state says its ok for me to execute my wife if she cheats on me, then is doing so ok in the eyes of God? Obviously not.
---
As to why we non-religious folk feel the need to discuss religion so often... I don't know about anyone else, but in a lot of cases I'm just trying to understand the mindset of a (christian) religious person. I don't get it really, how can anyone have so much faith in something that (as far as I've seen) is so much baloney? I'm absolutely astounded by the crazy arguments that are used to justify this or that thing that someone did, or this or that thing that God did, or the way the OT God is so different from the God of the NT, or the way parts of the bible (that they believe are literally true) can be true in spite of mountains of evidence to the contrary. I guess I don't understand faith.
From dictionary.com
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
kill1 Audio pronunciation of "kill" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kl)
v. killed, kill·ing, kills
v. tr.
1.
1. To put to death.
2. To deprive of life: The Black Death was a disease that killed millions.
2. To put an end to; extinguish: The rain killed our plans for a picnic.
3.
1. To destroy a vitally essential quality in: Too much garlic killed the taste of the meat.
2. To cause to cease operating; turn off: killed the motor.
3. To tire out completely; exhaust: “The trip to work, and the boredom and nervousness of jobs, kills men” (Jimmy Breslin).
4. To pass (time) in aimless activity: killed a few hours before the flight by sightseeing.
5. To consume entirely; finish off: kill a bottle of brandy.
6. Sports. To prevent a hockey team on a power play from scoring during (a penalty).
7. To cause extreme pain or discomfort to: My shoes are killing me.
8. To mark for deletion; rule out: killed the story.
9. To thwart passage of; veto: kill a congressional bill.
10. Informal. To overwhelm with hilarity, pleasure, or admiration: The outstanding finale killed the audience.
11. Sports.
1. To hit (a ball) with great force.
2. To hit (a ball) with such force as to make a return impossible, especially in a racquet game.
v. intr.
1. To cause death or extinction; be fatal.
2. To commit murder.
3. Informal. To make such a strong impression as to overcome: dress to kill.
n.
1. The act of killing.
2.
1. An animal killed, especially in hunting.
2. A person killed or to be killed: “Infantrymen... had seen too many kills suddenly get up and run away or shoot at them as they approached” (Nelson DeMille).
3. An enemy aircraft, vessel, or missile that has been attacked and destroyed.
3. Sports. A kill shot.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, again from dictionary.com
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
mur·der Audio pronunciation of "murder" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mûrdr)
n.
1. The <b> unlawful </b> killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
2. Slang. Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.
v. mur·dered, mur·der·ing, mur·ders
v. tr.
1. To kill (another human) <b> unlawfully. </b>
2. To kill brutally or inhumanly.
3. To put an end to; destroy: murdered their chances.
4. To spoil by ineptness; mutilate: a speech that murdered the English language.
5. Slang. To defeat decisively; trounce.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Notice how in the two definitions murder is unlawful (at the time of the writings of the 10 commandments there was no such law) while kill has quite a few meanings but basically comes down to ending life.
Now the word that was on the one of the orginal scripts of the bible was this.
<!--c1--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>CODE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='CODE'><!--ec1-->
לַהֲרֹג
<!--c2--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--ec2-->
Which means kill, for those that can not read hebrew.
<!--c1--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>CODE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='CODE'><!--ec1-->
רֶצַח
<!--c2--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--ec2-->
Murder looks like that. Which is why it is not murder. If you can not see the difference, I would take a magnifying glass and look at the screen.
I think I'll rip these to shreds before I crash, it'd be a nice midnight snack for my head.
QUOTE
Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
Best translated "Thou shalt not murder"
No, no it is not.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh boy, now someone who doesn't think the Bible isn't the Word of God is going to tell us what it actually means.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->you imply that killing someone, if there is legal grounds to do so, is acceptable. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Abortion anyone?
Yes, I know you don't believe the fetus is a person so it doesn't count. So don't say it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I mean, after all, if the state says its ok for me to execute my wife if she cheats on me, then is doing so ok in the eyes of God? Obviously not.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually...
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Rom. 13:4 He is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That basically meant that LAWFUL government, as God's servant, may execute criminals and fight just wars. While i'm not saying God approves of the slaying cheating wives, or that we should even do it... Just trying to clarify...something. If I could remember what it was I was talking about anyways.
Mathew 10:11
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->“Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave. As you enter the home, give it your greeting. If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town."<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Guys, i'm pretty sure the Holy Spirit is the bringer of faith, not the Internet.