Why I think a lot of the Bible is False

[sandy whitelinger]

Except Paul said that, not Jesus.

I don't listen to Paul or that part of the Bible, as from what I've heard of what Paul said, his philosophy doesn't agree with mine in any way. If someone else, such as you, wants to listen to him, that's fine. I don't consider him to be part of the "canon" of my personal Christian aspects; with Christianity, if Christ didn't say it, it doesn't count. After all, Jesus frequently debunked his own apostles because they were misunderstanding him; I see no reason why Paul wouldn't make similar mistakes, and he didn't have Jesus at his side constantly to correct him. (the resurrection for me is an allegory) But, that's my opinion.

My point is, if you want to convince me of something like why death is in the world, you'll have to quote either the Torah or Jesus himself. I currently consider the rest of the Bible to be secondary in their philosophies at best. (Even if they're good stories, such as Esther)

In that case there is nothing more I wish to discuss with you.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Curse?
Interesting take on it.

It's the Biblical position.

Then why strive for that wich you cannot obtain?
Further more, why do those who strive for something they cabbot ever obtain insist on telling everyone else that they needs strive as well?
Seems a bit insane, don't you think?.

What the heck are you talking about?

ah yes.
Destiny.
Before I begin though, is destiny the same as fate or do you distinguish the two?
If you distinguish the two, please be so kind as to explain how you distinguish them.

Use the dictionary's definition.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Well, instead of trying to tell us we're wrong, why not try correcting us?
"Geno-cide" is simply the killing of a gene-pool. And humans have been doing this for ever, not just with each other, but with all life.

You obviously are in need of much correction.

From Merriam Webster:

Main Entry: geno·cide Pronunciation: \ˈje-nə-ˌsīd\ Function: noun Date: 1944 : the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
— geno·cid·al \ˌje-nə-ˈsī-dəl\ adjective

So, because he hasn't cited the quote, it doesn't exist? Do you think that God didn't say that? Have you actually read the Torah?

I didn't cite it because I don't see the need to, as God says it numerous times in the Torah, primarily in the parts that deal with Idolatry.

But, since you insist on not looking yourself...

BibleGateway.com - Keyword*Search: jealous god

You're confused, again. I question the use of the word vain in the context and wish to know the source that the original poster used his quote from.

 

[Riverwolf]

You obviously are in need of much correction.

From Merriam Webster:

Main Entry: geno·cide Pronunciation: \ˈje-nə-ˌsīd\ Function: noun Date: 1944 : the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
— geno·cid·al \ˌje-nə-ˈsī-dəl\ adjective

I don't need a dictionary to know a word's root, and I go by roots, not by modern connotations. (I try to anyway; I come up short frequently) In this case, genus, and cide: genus, and death. And I consider all life to belong to different "genus-es", so when we cause an extinction of a form of life, it's genocide.

You're confused, again. I question the use of the word vain in the context and wish to know the source that the original poster used his quote from.

Maybe a different translation than the one you use?

 

[raibeart]

Where can I read about this?

Isaiah 2:1-5

1This is what Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalemd:

2In the last days the mountian of the Lord's temple will be established as cheif among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and all nations will stream to it.

3 Many peoples will come and say, "Come let us go up to the mountains of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk om his paths." The law will go out from Zion, the word of the LORD of Jerusalem.

4 He will judge between the nation and will settle disputes for many people. THEY WILL BEAT THEIR SWORDS INTO PLOWSHARES, AND THEIR SPEARS INTO PRUNING HOOKS. NATION WILL NOT TAKE UP SWORD AGAINST NATION, NOR WILL THEY TRAIN FOR WAR ANYMORE.

5 Come, O house of Jacob, let ua walk the light of the LORD.

This is one of the biggest prophecies that needs to be filled by the Messiah and Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy.

 

[little_monkey]

So, is the Bible false, yes or no?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

So, is the Bible false, yes or no?

The question is flawed.

 

[little_monkey]

The question is flawed.

I'm guessing at your answer. Correct me if I'm wrong: do you mean that some parts are true, and some are not?

 

[raibeart]

Biased: Yes only the OT is true and the NT is false.

Unbiased. Yes and no. Some of the NT may be true, but not all of it. Some of it could be fabricated, some could actually ahve been. It is hard to say.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

So, is the Bible false, yes or no?

The question is flawed.

I'm guessing at your answer. Correct me if I'm wrong: do you mean that some parts are true, and some are not?

I am certain that some parts are true and some are not, particularly if by 'true' one means 'historically accurate.' But we are a mythopoetic people and their are other standards of 'truth' that have relevance when it comes to our folk narrative. The exodus/conquest of the Torah is, to adopt Dever's phrase, "historical myth" but remains deeply true for each of us.

 

[little_monkey]

Biased: Yes only the OT is true and the NT is false.

Unbiased. Yes and no. Some of the NT may be true, but not all of it. Some of it could be fabricated, some could actually ahve been. It is hard to say.

Some would say, it is either all true, but any small part is false, then the whole thing is false. How would you counter that? Is it important to decide -- it is true or false -- if it depends on what part is true and which are not?

 

[Riverwolf]

Some would say, it is either all true, but any small part is false, then the whole thing is false. How would you counter that? Is it important to decide -- it is true or false -- if it depends on what part is true and which are not?

First you have to clarify what you mean by "true." Historically true? Philosophically true? Practically true? Mythologically true?

Is the Bible a good source of history? No. It is biased and full of gaps.

Is the Bible a good source of philosophy? Definitely. I consider many of the philosophies of Jesus to be very true.

Does the Bible accurately describe the Spiritual realm? That remains to be seen. (but I'd guess... not likely)

 

[little_monkey]

First you have to clarify what you mean by "true." Historically true? Philosophically true? Practically true? Mythologically true?

Is the Bible a good source of history? No. It is biased and full of gaps.

Is the Bible a good source of philosophy? Definitely. I consider many of the philosophies of Jesus to be very true.

Does the Bible accurately describe the Spiritual realm? That remains to be seen. (but I'd guess... not likely)

True in the sense that every word speaks of the truth -- no errors whether historical, scientific, philosophics, logical, etc. After all, if this is the "word of God", then it should be absolutely true in every imaginable way...

 

[Riverwolf]

True in the sense that every word speaks of the truth -- no errors whether historical, scientific, philosophics, logical, etc. After all, if this is the "word of God", then it should be absolutely true in every imaginable way...

Except that the Bible never claims to be the "Word of God." That label was given to it by other people when the current canon was compiled by Constantine, hundreds of years after the gospels were written.

Just because there are details that are incorrect, which is always true of every history book, anyway, does that mean the overall message is void? After all, the Golden Rule is NOT "worship God every chance you get and if you simply say the words 'I accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior' that's an automatic get-out-of-hell-free card and make sure that you have no doubts that the Bible is the Word of God";

it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Try to name any Christian political leader who actually followed that. (I'm sure there are some at least)

 

[little_monkey]

Except that the Bible never claims to be the "Word of God." That label was given to it by other people when the current canon was compiled by Constantine, hundreds of years after the gospels were written.

Just because there are details that are incorrect, which is always true of every history book, anyway, does that mean the overall message is void? After all, the Golden Rule is NOT "worship God every chance you get and if you simply say the words 'I accept Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior' that's an automatic get-out-of-hell-free card and make sure that you have no doubts that the Bible is the Word of God";

it's "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

Try to name any Christian political leader who actually followed that. (I'm sure there are some at least)

So sure, you can find some truths in there, but so in Homer's Odyssey and many other texts. But the bible holds a special place for Christians. So the debate about its veracity must focus around what Christians say about it. If you take the interpretation that Jesus died on the cross to redeem humanity because of Adam&Eve's original sin, then it matters that Adam and Eve were created as described in the bible and committed the original sin. Now, it may not be your interpretation, but it is the most prevalent one. And the whole thing hinges on that. Or am I mistaken?

On a side note: as to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," you can find that in other cultures, such as the Ancient Greeks and Indians.

 

[Riverwolf]

So sure, you can find some truths in there, but so in Homer's Odyssey and many other texts. But the bible holds a special place for Christians. So the debate about its veracity must focus around what Christians say about it. If you take the interpretation that Jesus died on the cross to redeem humanity because of Adam&Eve's original sin, then it matters that Adam and Eve were created as described in the bible and committed the original sin. Now, it may not be your interpretation, but it is the most prevalent one. And the whole thing hinges on that. Or am I mistaken?

Only for Bible-literalists, and not all Christians are such. Some might view the original sin by Adam and Eve to be a metaphor for something the first humans, as an entire group, did that was against God. (maybe touching that big black dominoe thingie wasn't such a good idea...)

Don't forget that not all Christians are the same. In fact, there are some who feel the entire Hebrew Bible to be null and fake. Heck, the first guy to compile a Christian Bible, Marcion, felt the God in the Hebrew Bible to be evil and not the God Jesus taught, so his Christian Bible only had a mangled version of the Gospel of Luke, with all references to the Hebrew Bible ommited, and ten of Paul's letters. (and, of course, not many people liked him; one person even, to his face, called him the firstborn of Satan)

On a side note: as to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you," you can find that in other cultures, such as the Ancient Greeks and Indians.

Indians, yes. Ancient Greeks... I thought that if someone wronged you, you had to take revenge so as to regain your honor. Wasn't that demonstrated in the Odyssey?

And I never said the philosophical truths found in the Bible can only be found in the Bible.

 

[Heneni]

So, is the Bible false, yes or no?

Maybe.


PS: I'm happy i'm not struggling with this anymore. We are thousands of years into the end and we havent sorted out the basics yet. For me the bible is TRUTHFUL. A bit inaccurate when it comes to numbers and stuff, but still pretty darn amazing.

 

[little_monkey]

Only for Bible-literalists, and not all Christians are such. Some might view the original sin by Adam and Eve to be a metaphor for something the first humans, as an entire group, did that was against God. (maybe touching that big black dominoe thingie wasn't such a good idea...)

Don't forget that not all Christians are the same. In fact, there are some who feel the entire Hebrew Bible to be null and fake. Heck, the first guy to compile a Christian Bible, Marcion, felt the God in the Hebrew Bible to be evil and not the God Jesus taught, so his Christian Bible only had a mangled version of the Gospel of Luke, with all references to the Hebrew Bible ommited, and ten of Paul's letters. (and, of course, not many people liked him; one person even, to his face, called him the firstborn of Satan)



Indians, yes. Ancient Greeks... I thought that if someone wronged you, you had to take revenge so as to regain your honor. Wasn't that demonstrated in the Odyssey?

And I never said the philosophical truths found in the Bible can only be found in the Bible.

According to a UN study, there are 34,000 Christian denominations. So yeah, they do not all agree on what the bible says, but they do have a common thread, otherwise the word "Christian" is meaningless. Also, Christians make up 33% of the world. There are 270 major religions, of which Christianity is only one, each claiming to have the absolute truth.

So, on that basis, who decides if the bible is true or false? and how do we decide? Obviously, a democratic vote on the question would yield a predictable resounding no.

And then even among a very small minority of those who would say that the bible is true, you would get thousands of different interpretations, each claiming to be the absolute truth.

 

[Riverwolf]

According to a UN study, there are 34,000 Christian denominations. So yeah, they do not all agree on what the bible says, but they do have a common thread, otherwise the word "Christian" is meaningless. Also, Christians make up 33% of the world. There are 270 major religions, of which Christianity is only one, each claiming to have the absolute truth.

So, on that basis, who decides if the bible is true or false? and how do we decide? Obviously, a democratic vote on the question would yield a predictable resounding no.

And then even among a very small minority of those who would say that the bible is true, you would get thousands of different interpretations, each claiming to be the absolute truth.

"The only way to be right is to be left."

The way I see it, all the religions have a piece of the truth. And that truth is not the same as fact. That truth is the answer to the ultimate question: "Why?"

No one religion can have all the answers. Even if you put them all together to create some kind of universal religion, in this instance, the whole is far greater than the sum of the parts. So, there are religions yet to emerge that will reveal a new truth that is currently unknown.

My Junior History teacher once said that each generation is "better" than the one that precedes it. So we are "better" than our parents, and our children will be "better" than us. And I agree with him.

 

[little_monkey]

"The only way to be right is to be left."

The way I see it, all the religions have a piece of the truth. And that truth is not the same as fact. That truth is the answer to the ultimate question: "Why?"

No one religion can have all the answers. Even if you put them all together to create some kind of universal religion, in this instance, the whole is far greater than the sum of the parts. So, there are religions yet to emerge that will reveal a new truth that is currently unknown.

My Junior History teacher once said that each generation is "better" than the one that precedes it. So we are "better" than our parents, and our children will be "better" than us. And I agree with him.

Your Junior History teacher had a nice story there, but in view of a lack of a definition of "better", it sounds more like wishful thinking.

I would also say the same about "all the religions have a piece of the truth". In my limited imagination, I see each religion being a big giant puzzle. Taking a piece here, a piece there from different puzzles, and how they would fit to make a puzzle -- that would be in need of a miracle. Sure, the typical answer here would be that "God works in mysterious ways". But to be frank, what works in mysterious ways is the inventive human imagination.