Historical Accuracy in Scripture

[Subduction Zone]

The truth is that I'm not interested in your Byzantine diatribes ... but if you want someone to believe something you say, stop your drama and start presenting real evidence.

As for me, that was all I have to tell you.
Good bye.

You probably do not know what "real evidence" is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Byzantine diatribes? I'm just citing well-evidenced facts on a debate thread.

OK, challenge accepted. Lets start with the Noachim flood.
Aron Ra has a series of YouTube videos debunking the story from eight different disciplines. Google, watch, and get back with your commentary.

His religion will not allow that. They can only watch approved videos.

 

[Valjean]

His religion will not allow that. They can only watch approved videos.

So asking for evidence was a ruse.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

 

[exchemist]

I don't know what you, enemies of the Bible, are up to... but the reality that you seem to ignore is the following:

Without the Bible, much of the human history we know today would have still remained a mystery to the whole world.

This is self-evidently absurd.Now I really am going to leave you to it. [click]

 

[Subduction Zone]

So asking for evidence was a ruse.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

It rarely is from believers.

 

[1213]

All well and good when The Bible is treated like Æsop's fables, but when literal belief is insisted on or mandated, as they so frequently are, there's a problem

Ok, I think Bible is good and truth, but I don't think everyone must believe what is said in the Bible.

 

[Valjean]

Ok, I think Bible is good and truth, but I don't think everyone must believe what is said in the Bible.

But the Bible is not good. It condones all sorts of behavior that would get you arrested today, if not in the docket at The Hague; behavior that everyone would agree was atrocious.
And it's clearly not truth. Much of its mythology is just flat-out wrong.

 

[sayak83]

I can have a hint of the level of "education" of atheistic persons on this and other forums ... No, thank you.

How do you think the world would be a better place to live: full of college students or full of Jehovah's Witnesses?

This people of Jehovah's Witnesses is a highly educated international community like the one you will not find any other. I am proud to be an active member.

Full of college educated students. Obviously. Going to college (actual college, not a seminary or something of that sort) is one of the best things a person can do with his/her life (as long as the cost is not so much that there is huge debts etc.) I have seen in US statistics at least that Jehovah's Witnesses have one of the least educationally qualified religious groups. I do not know why that is, but your group should certainly encourage your members to aspire for greater education and maybe help members in doing so.
The most and least educated U.S. religious groups

 

[Audie]

Ok, I think Bible is good and truth, but I don't think everyone must believe what is said in the Bible.

I would think so too if it seemed fair
play to change what it says.

 

[blü 2]

Does it matter if if the stories in religious scripture actually took place?

What is more important in scripture, historical accuracy or the lessons that can be learned from it?

Discuss.

It depends who you ask.

The strict historicity of Jesus is irrelevant to Christianity, whose Jesus is a supernatural entity who exercised supernatural powers while on earth. and questions so arising are dealt with by apologists ─ company men.

Then there's the serious question, was there an historical Jesus at all, and if there was, what if anything do we know about him. These days I'd answer this by saying, possibly, and if so, very little but some remarks can be made. But Bart Ehrman's books can be taken seriously, for the less academic enquirer (like me).

 

[Rachel Rugelach]

Does it matter if if the stories in religious scripture actually took place?

What is more important in scripture, historical accuracy or the lessons that can be learned from it?

Discuss.

In Judaism, what is most important is how well one followed the mitzvot (commandments) in the Torah during one's lifetime. I don't think that belief in the historical accuracy of religious scripture approaches anywhere near the importance of following these commandments in our day-to-day lives.

To quote the late Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel (one of the leading Jewish theologians and Jewish philosophers of the 20th century) from his book Moral Grandeur and Spiritual Audacity:

"What is the Jewish way to God? It is not a way of ascending the ladder of speculation. Our understanding of God is not the triumphant outcome of an assault upon the riddles of the universe or a donation we receive in return for intellectual surrender. Our understanding comes by the way of mitzvah. By living as Jews we attain our faith as Jews. We do not have faith in deeds; we attain faith through deeds."

 

[metis]

The Bible speaks of the Flood as a historical fact, and presents Adam and Eve as real people; but not only that, but Jesus confirms both as historical truths.

Allegory is dealt with scripturally as if what's cited was a historical event.

If any "Christian" comes to tell me that Adam and Eve did not exist or that the Flood did not really happen... that is not a true Christian, but a phony ... probably one of those posers who are not what they say they are.

So you don't believe in Jesus' words here:
Matthew 22[36] “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
[37] Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ [38] This is the first and greatest commandment. [39] And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ [40] All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

Notice that it doesn't say one must have correct interpretations of various narratives.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If the story of Jesus was an allegory, what would you say it represents?

I always thought ego death leading to salvation, but Jesus was already divine when he died.

 

[metis]

If the story of Jesus was an allegory, what would you say it represents?

I didn't imply it's all allegory, nor do I believe it is.

I always thought ego death leading to salvation, but Jesus was already divine when he died.

The issue of "divine" and in which way is conjectural, as is "salvation", as there's different ways to look at them. I'm more concerned what the teachings are and whether they're useful today and tomorrow.

BTW, consider using the quote option as I almost missed your post.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

In Judaism, what is most important is how well one followed the mitzvot (commandments) in the Torah during one's lifetime.

Perhaps -- but we've just finished reading Parashat Pinchas , and both questions concerning its historicity, and thought given to the traditions and attitudes it nurtures*, warrant consideration.

Also worth noting is that history can too often be a zero sum game. The history we profess often taints or erases the history of the others, and we're left with an apologetic - typically called Biblical History - that is adrift in the theme: "Jews fairly good; Philistines pretty bad; Midianites G-d awful."

So, in my opinion, much more important than the question

• Is the Bible historical?

is the question

• Should History be Biblical?

* Some 60+ years ago Medgar Evers was assassinated by a man who who would identify himself as a Phineas Priest.

 

[Valjean]

Allegory is dealt with scripturally as if what's cited was a historical event.

So you don't believe in Jesus' words here:
Matthew 22[36] “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
[37] Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ [38] This is the first and greatest commandment. [39] And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ [40] All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

Notice that it doesn't say one must have correct interpretations of various narratives.

...Or mandate doctrinal orthodoxy; or condemn heretical beliefs -- both of which are common and problematic in religious circles.

 

[Eli G]

Allegory is dealt with scripturally as if what's cited was a historical event.

...

That's bahais' erroneus perspective.

Jesus said:

Matt. 24:37 For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 38 For as they were in those days before the Flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39 and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.

So, if there is someone who says that the Flood was not a historical event, he is not a follower of Jesus (for not believing his words) but a follower of Baháʼu'lláh or simply an atheist.

 

[Eli G]

... Should History be Biblical? ...

A large part of the universal history that we know was obtained from the Bible and was verified through documents and pieces unearthed in subsequent excavations in biblical places.

Although atheists today try to discredit the Bible as a reliable document, modern knowledge and science are based on the Bible and the scientific work of thousands of believing men in the past.

Modern anti-Bible attitude is just b*** from some atheists, desperate to become controllers of the masses, so they need to remove God and his written Word from the equation. That will never happen.

Have you ever wondered why the languages and human races are called Semitic, Japhetic, and Hamitic? Well, investigate, because it seems that there are many ignoramuses taking advantage of the anonymity of the Internet to pose as intellectuals.

 

[Valjean]

A large part of the universal history that we know was obtained from the Bible and was verified through documents and pieces unearthed in subsequent excavations in biblical places.

Although atheists today try to discredit the Bible as a reliable document, modern knowledge and science are based on the Bible and the scientific work of thousands of believing men in the past.

Modern anti-Bible attitude is just b*** from some atheists, desperate to become controllers of the masses, so they need to remove God and his written Word from the equation. That will never happen.

Have you ever wondered why the languages and human races are called Semitic, Japhetic, and Hamitic? Well, investigate, because it seems that there are many ignoramuses taking advantage of the anonymity of the Internet to pose as intellectuals.

It's not b*** from some atheists. That's a facile rationalization.
It's Biblical scholars, linguists, historians, chemists, geologists, archæologists, physicists, dendrochronologists, &al. who question its veracity.

You believe it to be accurate. OK, Why do you believe this? What evidence is your belief based on? And finally, how do you refute the evidence presented by the above disciplines?

I contend that your position is entirely based on faith, rather than knowledge. You believe because you were raised to believe. You were told this was true from childhood; everyone around you acknowledged it as true; you were sheltered from any information to the contrary, and never taught logic or critical thinking skills.

 

[Valjean]

That's bahais' erroneus perspective.

Jesus said:

Matt. 24:37 For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 38 For as they were in those days before the Flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39 and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.

So, if there is someone who says that the Flood was not a historical event, he is not a follower of Jesus (for not believing his words) but a follower of Baháʼu'lláh or simply an atheist.

...Or maybe an educated or unindoctrinated person, or scholar, or thinker.

You sayflood deniers do not follow the words of Jesus/the Bible. How do you know Jesus said this? -- cause the Bible says so? How do you know the Bible is accurate? -- cause it says so? And how would Jesus or the Bible know anything about a primordial flood? Cause they were inspired by God? How do we know that? -- cause the Bible says so?

None of this is based on any evidence, whereas there is conspicuous evidence of no flood occurring. Should we believe our own eyes, or unevidenced folklore? Which is more reasonable?