The bible debunked.

Is there a god? What is the meaning of life?
User avatar
chickenlittle
Fledgling
Posts: 195
Joined: Sep 22nd, 2008, 1:25 pm

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by chickenlittle »

ogleby wrote:In the Aramaic, the man would probably have been called Jeshua ben (or bar) Joseph -- Jeshua, son of Joseph. To bolster claims of his proper decent as prophesied he has been called Jeshua bar David, or Jeshua, son of David. Jeshua is roughly akin to modern John. Hence, John, son of David -- John Davidson.

Do you troubled souls understand now?


Got how you came up with name... Still confused as to who "the John Davidson from tv and stuff we know was born to two Baptist ministers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania" is ???????
User avatar
Mr Danksworth
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mar 7th, 2006, 8:38 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Mr Danksworth »

Don't sweat it, he/she is either trollbait or a pretard.
Nothing on the Internet is so serious it can't be laughed at, and nothing is as laughable as people who think otherwise.
User avatar
ogleby
Fledgling
Posts: 212
Joined: Nov 13th, 2007, 5:53 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by ogleby »

soulra wrote:Don't sweat it, he/she is either trollbait or a pretard.


Oooh! Ouch. Such eloquence should be enshrined somewhere.
How long must a body be buried before a grave-robber becomes an archeologist?
User avatar
unclemarty
Board Meister
Posts: 667
Joined: Jul 23rd, 2008, 7:21 pm

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by unclemarty »

Yeshua = Salvation (present tense)

"...and you will name him Yeshua. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.
Adonai, God, will give him the throne of King David, his ancestor. He will rule over the people of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will never end."
Luke 1:30
"Jerusalem is a port city on the shore of eternity." - Yehuda Amichai
User avatar
Mr Danksworth
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mar 7th, 2006, 8:38 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Mr Danksworth »

Well....that sorts that out. :eyeballspin:
Nothing on the Internet is so serious it can't be laughed at, and nothing is as laughable as people who think otherwise.
I Think
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10469
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 6:12 pm

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by I Think »

What if they're right?
Yuh croak,
wake up at the pearly gates,
St pete looks you in the eye,
an you say - oooooh sh!!!!!!!t.

Hey guys, any one wanna come with me sunday????
We're lost but we're making good time.
User avatar
Mr Danksworth
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mar 7th, 2006, 8:38 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Mr Danksworth »

"but what if you're wrong?!?' Ahhh...an oldie but a goodie.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg
Nothing on the Internet is so serious it can't be laughed at, and nothing is as laughable as people who think otherwise.
I Think
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10469
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 6:12 pm

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by I Think »

I meant the JU JU.

Or what if its the pearly gates & you have to fight shiva to get to pete? Or thor
We're lost but we're making good time.
subversionist
Newbie
Posts: 49
Joined: Jul 6th, 2009, 10:24 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by subversionist »

chickenlittle wrote: Similarialy, Paul does not mention a physical resurrection.

Mere mention of this in just about any main stream church will either get you booted out or result in many prayers being said to rid you of the devil's influence.



-First, a follow-up to your comment on Paul and Jesus' physical resurrection. Check out 1 Corinthians chapter 15.

-Secondly, I hope and believe there are many churches and Christian faith communities that are not threatened by discussion over the nature of the bible's composition and would certainly not boot people who have differences of opinion, especially if they can debate in a respectful manner (perhaps aside from churches with a strong fundamentalist tinge). I myself am a pastor in the community and certainly enjoy/appreciate thoughtful debate/discussion.

-Thirdly, the Bible does present many challenges. I wholeheartedly agree that it has been used and abused and manipulated throughout history to support all sorts of ungodly causes by selfish people. It must be read and interpreted in community, using all the reason God gave us, under the guidance of his Spirit. That said, I for one, am a more generous, open-minded, tolerant, and compassionate person because of the life of Christ as recorded in scripture. I believe I am not the only one.

Peace
User avatar
Born_again
Guru
Posts: 5352
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 2:21 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Born_again »

subversionist wrote:
..... -Secondly, I hope and believe there are many churches and Christian faith communities that are not threatened by discussion over the nature of the bible's composition and would certainly not boot people who have differences of opinion, especially if they can debate in a respectful manner (perhaps aside from churches with a strong fundamentalist tinge). I myself am a pastor in the community and certainly enjoy/appreciate thoughtful debate/discussion. .......


Peace


Welcome to the forums, subversionist! Let's hope that we can enjoy a long and fruitful dialogue.

Onwards and upwards.....

With regards to the bible; I can fully accept that there will be hefty amounts of inconsistencies and contradiction for a book that has been assembled from a multitude of texts, sources, transliterations, and all gathered from a multitude of religions and ideologies over a lengthy period of time. My problem is with the overall precept, and what the bible actually is.

  1. Is it the faithful word of the Abrahamic God?
  2. Under what authority/license/sanction was it written by the multitude of scribes?
  3. Is it about a singular authority; to be regarded as the word of one god?
  4. Does it allow/authorise interpretation?[the Koran by comparison has strict edicts governing such matters]
  5. Should the Koran not reasonably take it's position within the Holy Bible as the 'New, New Testament'?

I have more questions, but I'll keep it in bite-sized chunks for now and see how it goes.
Image
User avatar
Mr Danksworth
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mar 7th, 2006, 8:38 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Mr Danksworth »

Born_again wrote:[*]Should the Koran not reasonably take it's position within the Holy Bible as the 'New, New Testament'?[/list]


Don't forget about the b.o.m.. It's a retcon of the second book.
Nothing on the Internet is so serious it can't be laughed at, and nothing is as laughable as people who think otherwise.
User avatar
Born_again
Guru
Posts: 5352
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 2:21 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Born_again »

I was mindful of that, as well as scripts relative to Rastafarians, Samaritans, Bahai and Druze.
Image
User avatar
Mr Danksworth
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mar 7th, 2006, 8:38 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by Mr Danksworth »

What a gong show.
Nothing on the Internet is so serious it can't be laughed at, and nothing is as laughable as people who think otherwise.
subversionist
Newbie
Posts: 49
Joined: Jul 6th, 2009, 10:24 am

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by subversionist »

[/quote]

Welcome to the forums, subversionist! Let's hope that we can enjoy a long and fruitful dialogue.

Onwards and upwards.....

With regards to the bible; I can fully accept that there will be hefty amounts of inconsistencies and contradiction for a book that has been assembled from a multitude of texts, sources, transliterations, and all gathered from a multitude of religions and ideologies over a lengthy period of time. My problem is with the overall precept, and what the bible actually is.

  1. Is it the faithful word of the Abrahamic God?
  2. Under what authority/license/sanction was it written by the multitude of scribes?
  3. Is it about a singular authority; to be regarded as the word of one god?
  4. Does it allow/authorise interpretation?[the Koran by comparison has strict edicts governing such matters]
  5. Should the Koran not reasonably take it's position within the Holy Bible as the 'New, New Testament'?

I have more questions, but I'll keep it in bite-sized chunks for now and see how it goes.[/quote]


Thanks for the warm welcome! I am by no means the most qualified to answer these questions. I've always been more concerned about practics than scholastics. I'm not sure about the forum rules about links to external websites but an excellent source for discussion on the nature of the Bible is the Christian Resource Institute. For instance, relating to your first question, I was was prompted to read an article (a very long one!) entitled "Sacred Words? or Words about the Sacred?" Here is the author's (Dennis Bratcher) closing paragraph,

"Dealing honestly with Scripture as we have it beyond making theological assertions about it while ignoring the text itself, requires an admission that the biblical texts that we have bear unmistakable human fingerprints. That is, for all that we want to say about the Bible being the word of God, which is certainly true on one level, the reality is that it is God’s word in human words. The physical writing that we have is very fallible, while at the same time communicating infallible truths. But those truths about God and about us and about our relationship with God do not just fall off the page because we read the text. They must be understood by careful and reasoned analysis beyond simply saying “God said.” And that analysis must begin by taking seriously the text of Scripture as we have it, with all of the errors in writing and copying that it contains. It then becomes our task to use every available tool at our disposable to better understand the word of God, the message that we can trust to be a faithful and true testimony to God and his work with us humans, that these very fallible human words communicate."

As you no doubt know there is much internal debate within the church on the nature and interpretation of Scripture. Yet, this debate is still held within a framework. Interpretation must be affirmed by the faith community. It must line up with the traditional creeds of the church (Apostle's, Nicene). Those that refuse accountability to this framework are movements are traditionally classified as "cults."

Anyways I'll take some feeble stabs at your questions. There are literally libraries written in regards to biblical interpretation.

1.) I certainly believe the Bible is trustworthy and true in revealing to us the nature and character of God, and the nature of humankind. That said, it is irresponsible to pick random passages, remove them from their context in scripture and history and apply them to subjectively at will. Both those inside and outside the church are guilty of this. There are all sorts of problems with reading scripture not understanding its genre or purpose.

2.) The Bible was not gathered and formed haphazardly or in a vaccuum. It is and has always been the testimony of the faith community. What is amazing to me is not disagreement over the inclusion of certain books or portions of the Bible, but rather the amount of consistency and consensus within the faith community over thousands of years and countless cultures.

3.) I'm not sure I understand the question. Christianity is certainly a monotheistic faith. The consensus within the church would be that yes the Bible is the story of the revelation of the one true God.

4.) The Bible certainly allows interpretation. In many instances New Testament authors, including Jesus himself, interpret Old Testament passages. Interpretations must always remain subject to the scriptures themselves. Jesus criticized those who elevated their interpretations above the law found in scripture (Matthew 15:3). In many instances Jesus corrects incorrect interpretation of the Old Testament.

5.) As I said the Bible has been affirmed by the Christian community as the word of God. The Koran has not (I am certainly not an expert on the Koran). I have no doubt that there is much in the Koran that is exemplary but it certainly is not Christian scripture, first and foremost because it does not have the affirmation of the Christain community.
I Think
Walks on Forum Water
Posts: 10469
Joined: May 29th, 2008, 6:12 pm

Re: The bible debunked.

Post by I Think »

subversionist wrote:5.) As I said the Bible has been affirmed by the Christian community as the word of God. The Koran has not (I am certainly not an expert on the Koran). I have no doubt that there is much in the Koran that is exemplary but it certainly is not Christian scripture, first and foremost because it does not have the affirmation of the Christain community.


So what you are saying here is that the bible is the word of god, because the christian community affirms that it is.
What does god say about needing your affirmation?
We're lost but we're making good time.

Return to “Religion & Spirituality”