WHY THE INJUSTIS

[Pie]

...... BUT WHAT ABOUT ME????? EVERYONE ENDS ON A NOTE THAT IGNORES ME!!!!


But, the reed sea isn't the medeteranian sea. So NE!!!!!

[chadpants]

One more thing. I've heard all these great thoughts on why biblical stories aren't true.

Sounds like a lot of thought has been given and you've considered all the reasons why it can't be true. But ask yourself an honest question. Put away all the naysaying for just a moment and open your mind.

Have you ever considered that it could be true?

Sure... it just didn't take.

[formerly known as hf]

Was it not in here that somone tryed to make the translation of the bible fals? Never the les... THE ILIAD WAS THE GREEK BIBLE. Literaly THE GREEEK BIBLE. And the iliad was writtin 1000 YEARS AFTER ITS OCCERANCE. Thus making anything posible. Making it posible for it to be intyerly fals, and yet, troy is said to be here, some Archeologists take the battle for reality.

If you knoiw nothing on a subject, as you clearly do in the case of ancient Greek Mythology and religions, then shut up about it pie.
The Illiad was not the ancient Greek bible. Not by any stretch. It was written as a story, a myth, a fairytale, based upon a very long oral tradition of storytelling. It never claimed to be entirely true, and no one reads it as such. Whoever has taught you to see the Illiad as the 'GREEEK BIBLE' and the rest of the utter nonsense you are spouting about it, has deeply mislead you.

One more thing. I've heard all these great thoughts on why biblical stories aren't true.

Sounds like a lot of thought has been given and you've considered all the reasons why it can't be true. But ask yourself an honest question. Put away all the naysaying for just a moment and open your mind.

Have you ever considered that it could be true?

So much time is spent trying to both disprove and prove the Bible. I believe that many of the historical contexts of the Bible are accurate, as are the contexts in many other religious scriptures. Just because I believe Hindu ancient scriptures and myths have basis in history, does that mean I should believe in the Hindu religion?

[swymir]

[quote="Pie]

But, the reed sea isn't the medeteranian sea. So NE!!!!![/quote]

What does anything have to do with the Medeteranian Sea? Neither I nor the Bible ever mentions it in relation to Mosses.

[KiNG KiLL]

One more thing. I've heard all these great thoughts on why biblical stories aren't true.

Sounds like a lot of thought has been given and you've considered all the reasons why it can't be true. But ask yourself an honest question. Put away all the naysaying for just a moment and open your mind.

Have you ever considered that it could be true?

Well, then I must reply with an answer to you, Stan... have you ever considered that Homer's stories about greek gods and the scientology's beliefs in a space lord to be true? I mean... why shouldn't they be? And it wouldn't be any more incredible than the bible. Jesus walks on the water, make bread and fish appear from thin air, dies and ressurects, heals a man that's been dead, a star points the way to his birth place, he can see into the future... imagine me and some friends wrote a story about this guy with all the gifts and skills as listed above... it would probably come off like a comic rather than a religion, right? The only difference is that the super hero saga about Jesus was written about 2000 years ago...

Sure, the bible could be true, but so much in it obviously isn't true. Or do you believe every word in it, Stan?

[Stan]

THIS IS LONG. I APOLOGIZE, BUT I DON’T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER THE QUESTION ANY OTHER WAY.

I believe every word in the Bible. I don't think you can believe that the Bible comes from God and at the same time believe that it contains lies or inaccuracies. I believe that it contains parables and metaphors, but those are obvious in the text by considering the context.

But, I didn't believe it in the past. In fact, I thought some of it was true and some of it exaggerated or representative. After studying it and reading the prophecy that was in the Old Testament and reading how it came true later in the OT and the NT, I thought there just might be something to it. You need to remember that the Bible wasn’t published as a single book. It was put together over thousands of years. Things that were written as prophecy in the older books either came true or they didn’t. If the older books had been revised people of the time would have known. It is common knowledge that the Israelites/Jews of the time memorized every verse of the scriptures. An example of something that was written before anyone understood the meaning can be found in Genesis 1:26. Remember that Judaism is monotheistic. Christianity is monotheistic, too, but we believe there are 3 faces of God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

If you look in Genesis 1:26, which is and was a book included in the Torah (Jewish “Bible”) God says something quite interesting. Remember this was written and published before Jesus even existed. It says, “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness…”. Moses, who is credited with writing Genesis would have no concept of multiple Gods or multiple faces of God, so why did he write “us” and “our”? The whole concept of the Trinity didn’t exist until thousands of years later. That’s just the simplest example I can come up with.

But, there's a bit more to it than that as to why I believe it.

First, I if I read ancient text such as the bible I tend to believe there is, at least, a kernel of truth to it, unless it is obviously written as fiction. So, I suppose I do have a predisposition to "give it a chance". After all, it was no easy task to write words at the time these books were written. It’s not like you and me picking up a piece of paper and jotting down whatever pops in our head. They had to produce the writing instrument and produce the paper it was written on. Then they had to carry it around or put it somewhere. Some of the OT books written on the scrolls they were written on where tens of feet long. My point is that someone took great care and time to produce these documents. There must be some truth to what they were trying to convey, the other option is that it was a conspiracy carried out over thousands of years and including thousands of people including me. Another example is the parting of the Red Sea. Moses wrote it down and gave it to the people who were there with him. He died before they even made it to Israel. It would be virtually impossible to write something as an historical fact, present it in text to the people who were there with you, die and have it survive unchanged after your death.

Then, I try to observe whether or not what I read is 1. truthful in an observable way, and 2. relevant to me. Let’s face it; if it is truthful but doesn’t have any impact in my life I’m not likely to pay much attention. For example, Invacare might produce the best wheelchair in the world, but if I can walk I’m not too concerned with wheelchairs.

Let me tackle relevance first…it’s easy. The Bible tells me that if I don’t believe that Jesus was the Christ and ask for His salvation then I’m going to go to hell…forever. To me forever is a very long time. My ears immediately perk up. This material sounds relevant to me.

Now, on the truthful part...I’m not much of an historian. So, I can’t argue historical proof of many things in the Bible so I’ll focus on things that are observable to me. These are things that I’ve witnessed. The accounts of the bread and walking on water are relayed to us to demonstrate Jesus’ power, but they aren’t supposed to be evidence today. Jesus walked on water as evidence to the people of that time not for us. It isn’t provable today.

But, this observable to me: Jesus said, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own….They will treat you this was because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me.” It never ceases to amaze me how much people get offended by the name Jesus. You can talk about God all day long, but once Jesus comes into the picture people get mad.

Another thing Jesus said that I have been able to observe is “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given to you.” I have been amazed time after time about this one. I remember a few years ago praying that I could give more. I was giving all I could, but I felt like there was more I could give. That was answered almost immediately and I testify now that it continues. This picture shows my income and how it changed when I asked to be able to give more.



I also believe there are some rather credible witnesses in the Bible, too. The first one that comes to my mind is Paul. Paul’s history was one of a man that was obsessed with killing Christians. It’s believed he was present and possibly participated in the stoning of Stephen for being a Christian. He was in route to going to capture other Christians in Damascus when he was struck blind and confronted by Jesus. There were men traveling with Paul (called Saul at that time) and the account says that they stood there “speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone.” He was escorted to Damascus by those traveling with him. After 3 days a man named Ananias came and placed his hands on Paul and “something like scales fell from Saul’s eyes”. After spending a few days with disciples in Damascus (the same people he came to capture) the Bible says, “At once he bagan to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God. All those who heard him were astonished and asked, ‘Isn’t he the man who raised havoc in Jerusalem among those who call on this name? And hasn’t he come here to take them prisoners to the chief priests?”

To me, Paul is a credible witness. He was powerful as a Jew. He killed Christians. He had Roman citizenship. And yet, he himself claims to be changed when confronted by Jesus (after he/Jesus was dead by the way). This would be like Osama bin Laden converting. It is presumed that Paul was later killed in Rome for his beliefs. These are all similar stories to what the Apostles wrote as well, and most of them died as martyrs, too. All any of them would have had to do was say they had been lying and they would have been set free. But they didn’t.

Long answer to a short question. But I think it was an important question.

[KiNG KiLL]

I like your long asnwer, Stan, I wouldn't want it any other way since this topic is of great importance. But I will be brief for now...

... This income thing... it's like saying god saved an ill person when a team of doctors work for hours to achieve the same goal. Would the person have survived without the doctors, and only by praying to god? No. Would you have gain this increase in income only by praying and doing good to others? No. You have earned it by working hard yourself, jesus wasn't involved in your salary-deals, right? Can't you see that? YOU make the difference by giving and helping people, not jesus. YOU are a good man, even without god and jesus... right?

[Stan]

I know that's a touchy subject. I've gotten mixed response from this example even from Christians.

All I can is this. When I made that prayer I was testing God to be faithful to His word and it came true. I believe it was an answer to my specific request and I think the least I can do is offer my testimony. I'm not the judge or jury. I'm just a witness.

I didn't ask the Lord to make me rich. I asked Him to give me the ability to give more and it was provided. When I made this prayer I hadn't read much of the bible. I thought to myself, "I want to know whether I can really believe this stuff before I go to far down this path". Later I found this scripture:

"Bring the whole tithe (offering) into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the Lord Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have have room enough for it."

God throws down the gauntlet on that one. He gives everyone on earth a chance to witness for themself whether what He says it true or not.

I always encourage anyone who doesn't completely believe me to test God themself. See if the promises written in the Bible are true or not.

Even if there is only an inkling that you think it might be true I think you'll get a clear answer. Jesus made this promise, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

[Pie]

[quote="Pie]

But, the reed sea isn't the medeteranian sea. So NE!!!!!

What does anything have to do with the Medeteranian Sea? Neither I nor the Bible ever mentions it in relation to Mosses.[/quote]

I believ it was you who tryed to argue that moseses miracle was just a calcano(Witch happened in the MEDETERANIAN SEA!!!!!) And the resulting tidal wave.

The iliad.... was a writing that proved that the greak gods were real, gave a story about what they did, and the resulting outcome of what miracles and stuff they did. Thats a bible to me. Evin if it dosent say it is the actual greak bible, it is in text, a bible trying to prove that zues and other greek gods are real.

And also H.F.... just becous the Hindu has some stuff in it that is true, dosent mean you should acept it.. but sicne it does have a historical bases, that means that it has some credibility. Now, if it is as EXACT AS THE BIBLE WAS(And i can give many a proof of the gosples being EXACTLY that) then that rases the credibility even more. If it has SCIKOLOGICAL EVIDENCE(As stan said.. the apostles became marters) Then that is even more credebility. IF IT HAS Historical, arecheological, scikological evidence, then I'd say it has alot of proof.

[formerly known as hf]

Have you read the Illiad pie? Do you even know the tiniest bit about ancient Greek mythology and religion? I find it disgusting the way you talk about it as if you are knowledgeable on the subject, when, as I have studied the subject to a fair extent over the past couple of years, it is clear you know very little. and what you do know is entirely warped and simply wrong.
The Illiad is in no sense the 'scriptures' of ancient Greek religion. It wasn't even written down at the height of the religion. The literacy rate in ancient Greece must have been minimal, hence there probably were no scriptures, and it was a truly oral religion with oral traditions of story telling.
The Illiad, along with the writing of other Myths, was an attempt by Homer (and others) to write-down what was traditionally told by oral storytellers. It is not an attempt to write about how people should live lives, or to proove the existence, or to be the word of the Gods.

I don't even know why you even brought up the fucking Illiad? It has absolutely no relevance to what was being discussed, and the utter ignorance of your knowedge of the subject, about the Illiad, what it is and its contexts. I don't even understand why on Earth you brought it up, it has done nothing to strengthen any of your arguments, and has simply pissed me off (It takes a heck of a lot to piss me off - but plain ignorance gets me to the quick easy) and made you look (more) stupid.

As for the Hindu scriptures, they have a lot or archaeological, astronomical, histroical and 'scikological(?)' evidence. So, yes, it has a lot of proof. You have continually suggested that archaeological, historical, etc. - scientific proof is all that is strong enough that the Bible and everything in it, must be true, and God should be believed in based on that. But that argument can be used by any number of religions when discussing their religions. So, I ask you again, if the Hindu scriptures (or many others for that matter) have that level of scientific proof - should I become Hindu based upon the proof about the Hindu scriptures? As that would seem to be what I should do based upon your argument about the proof of the Bible.

Sorry for that, but pie really did annoy me just then. I'd rather respond to Stan, who at least makes a lot of sense, but it'll be a short response as I'm just too tired right now.
I understand that you have experiences in your own life that, to you, show irrefutable proof that God exists. I'd echo what was said before, and propose that any benifits were of your own (and others) making. There's little else I have to say on the subject, as, at the end of the day, I find it deeply implausible that it, or anything else, was the work of God. I can accept that you do Stan, and I'm not going to be able to (and wouldn't really want to) even try to get you think otherwise. The same way no one could ever make me believe in God.

The only way I can ever imagine I'd believe in God is if he popped by my flat one day and burned all us pagans down. Even then, I'd probably attribute it to hallucination and arson...

I'm not sure even where this thread is going anymore?

[Stan]

Me either.

Get some sleep.

[Lauren]

@ Stan:

What you said about how unusual it is for so many (aren't there 60 +?) books of one document to be written, some without knowladge of the others, and for them to have the same prose style, the same message, the same prophecies?

I used to use that as my argument -for- Christianity. I try not to be for or against it now, but just doubting everything, you know? I really don't want any of you to think less of me based on my beliefs or lack thereof.

Anyway, that had nothing to do with anything.

@ hallucinatingfarmer:

I loved reading that. ^^

[Lauren]

Also, why wasn't there a debait about"For the republic of wich it stands" in the pledg of alegance? I mean, isn't that insulting for democrats? And the united states hasn't been a full republic since the cival war. Also, in alot of games, the people you play as are RIGHT HANDED. Dosent that ofend left handers? COMON!! STOP NITPICKING!!!!

One quick thing:

Take a civics class and you'll find that in fact, America is more of a republic than a democracy. Reason being: we elect people to represent us, not representing ourselves.

[Stan]

@ Stan:

What you said about how unusual it is for so many (aren't there 60 +?) books of one document to be written, some without knowladge of the others, and for them to have the same prose style, the same message, the same prophecies?

No, that's not what I meant. What I mean is that there are prophesies in the books that came true much later. My point was that these things didn't occur then the books were written about it. Obviously, the NT books were written after Jesus died, but the OT books and prophecy that Jesus fulfilled was written well before Jesus was born.

I used the Genesis example of when Moses wrote God's words. God referred to Himself in a plural sense. Moses had no concept of God being multiple (Trinity).

I really don't want any of you to think less of me based on my beliefs or lack thereof.

As far as anyone thinking less of you. I don't think they would. If they do, I wouldn't worry about it too much. You're young, right?

I've found through my life that your values and beliefs will slowly change over time when you experience things. I expect this continues throughout life as you witness and experience new things, like having children.

I enjoy discussion likes this not because I feel like I'm proving anyone wrong or because I'm smarter or wiser than someone else, but because when you explore ideas through debate the discussion becomes part of your life's experience.

For me, it is important to understand the mindset of an atheist or someone who's still exploring their spiritual identity. It raises questions in my own mind that I use to explore deeper and confirm or raise suspicion about what I believe. I have often times raised arguments about an issue and someone will find fault with it. By learning the faults I may find the true answer when I may have misunderstood my whole life.

For instance, in this debate and the one on the other thread I had to dig deep into my experience and knowledge to come up with answers. It was very enlightening to me.

If anyone thinks less of you or speaks down to you, just tell them you're a work in progress.

[Lauren]

I feel all warm and fuzzy now, thanks, Stan. No sarcasm.

Anyway, I thought this was very ironic... I borrowed a book from a friend of mine a few days ago called Condensed Knowlage, edited by these guys that started Mental Floss magazine, while they were at school at Duke here in NC. I must digress by saying North Carolina rocks...and Duke is a horrible college, but that's not the point...

Back on track, there's a chapter in there called "Condensed Religion," and a few tidbits of info on the Bible. I'll try and condense them more:

Five Myths About the Bible

1) There is a Bible
There is no Bible; there are only copies of copies of copies. The original text(s), however does not exist.

2) There is one Bible
The Bible came into being over a long perios and went through many revisions before its present form. Not surprisingly, not everyone agreed with the edits, so there are a number of Bibles in existence. For example, there are additional books in Catholic Bibles, a different order and structure in Jewish Bibles,* and a whole series of other gospels and text that did not make it into the New Testament. As late as the 1500s, Martin Luther was still arguing that the New Testament book of James shuold be expunged.

3) The Bible was written down from the beginning.
Both the Old and New Testaments begin in oral cultures -- that is, cultures that depended on word of mouth and storytelling to convey information. This means that the stories we read in the Bible were circulated orally, sometimes centuries before they were written down.

4) The writers of the Bible knew the Bible.
If you think abuot if a monent, you'll realize that the biblical authors didn't have the Bible in front of them because it was still being developed. Often biblical writers show absolutely no awareness of other Biblical tezts. One exception of course is that the authors of the New Testament knew the Old. But Paul, for example, cannot refer to the Gospels because they weren't written down when he was writing. In fact, the Gospels weren't written until 40 to 70 years after Jesus died and was resurrected and some 20 years after Paul's first letters.

5) The author is the author.
Ever wonder how Moses wrote about his own deatH? Well, he probably didn't. Ever wonder how Paul got so many by-lines in the New Testament? He probably shouldn't have. Our notions of authorship are relatively new, and during the time when the Bible was being composed, it was common for people to write using more famous or authoritive people's names.


Also listed in the book are text that didn't make it into the Bible, such as:

Susanna and the Elders, Judith, Tobit, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, and the Acts of Paul and Thecla.

Check it out.