The bible

PostmodernProphet said:
i chose to believe first hand commentary from the 1st.
Click to expand...

Remember: the Bible was written by people who didn't know the earth was 4.5 billion years old. They didn't know how to cure most disease. They had no clue how physics or chemistry really works. They still owned slaves (and the Bible even provides SUPPORT for this). And given the presence of "pseudepigraphs" they were occasionally prone to lying about authorship of things. They didn't care much about actual "correct" history either.

So I'm curious why you prefer their "word" on things.

Are you, perchance, a Biblical Literalist?

.........we can never agree.......
Click to expand...

Given that you want to hide from inconvenient knowledge that may be for the best.
 
Phoenyx said:
So recently, a poster here who I'm not sure if I should mention the name of given Rule 1 sent me a private message. He reminded me to some extent of a group of friendly Jehova witnesses who spent some time trying to convert me to their religion back when I lived in the state of Yucatan, Mexico. So after a few messages, I find that I couldn't respond to him anymore because his mailbox was full. Perhaps he'll make some space in his mailbox soon and I'll be able to send him my response.

But in the meantime, I thought I'd basically give my take on the bible here. In essence, I consider it a mix of history and fiction. I doubt I'd ever be able to prove that any of it is fictional, but I also doubt that anyone would be able to prove that all of is the truth, at least to anyone who doesn't just take it on faith.

Ironically, until reading a book called "The Da Vinci Code", and later watching it as a film, I never really questioned a lot of things that the bible and Christianity said were true. The Da Vinci Code book got the wheels in my mind turning, but it bills itself as a book of fiction, and the movie does as well. What really got me going was when I picked up a copy of one of the books that it used as source material, namely Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Since reading it, I know that it's had its fair share of critics, and even while reading it, there were some passages that I found dubious. Nevertheless, I found it immensely more interesting then what I had previously thought of the bible and christianity as a whole.

As to my own religion, I've been Pantheist ever since I found out that it essentially mirrored beliefs I'd developed on my own before hearing about it.

Anyway, some reference links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Da_Vinci_Code

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holy_Blood_and_the_Holy_Grail

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism
Click to expand...

What a shit thread. :dunno:
 
Matt Dillon said:
What a shit thread. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Come now Matt, didn't you ever watch Bambi :-p? For those who haven't, Thumper learned a valuable lesson in it, can be seen here :-)...


In all seriousness though, it's one thing to offer constructive criticism of a thread, quite another to just piss on it.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Perry Phimosis said:
What do you know about Christian Soteriology? I'm curious what you think it involves.
Click to expand...

What do you know about Christian anything? I would bet not much..
Click to expand...

I have no idea what Perry knows about christianity. However, for anyone who doesn't know about Soteriology, and Christian Soteriology in particular, Wikipedia has an entry for that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology


Its introduction to Soteriology:
**
Soteriology (/soʊˌtɪriˈɒlədʒi/; Greek: σωτηρία sōtēria "salvation" from σωτήρ sōtēr "savior, preserver" and λόγος logos "study" or "word"[1]) is the study of religious doctrines of salvation. Salvation theory occupies a place of special significance in many religions. In the academic field of religious studies, soteriology is understood by scholars as representing a key theme in a number of different religions and is often studied in a comparative context; that is, comparing various ideas about what salvation is and how it is obtained.
**

The part of the article that deals with Christian Soteriology in particular:
**
In Christianity, salvation, also called "deliverance" or "redemption", is the saving of human beings from sin and its consequences.[4][5] Variant views on salvation are among the main lines dividing the various Christian denominations, being a point of disagreement between Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, as well as within Protestantism, notably in the Calvinist–Arminian debate. These lines include conflicting definitions of depravity, predestination, atonement, and most pointedly, justification. Christian soteriology ranges from exclusive salvation[6]: p.123  to universal reconciliation[7] concepts.

While some of the differences are as widespread as Christianity itself, the overwhelming majority agrees that salvation is made possible by the life, crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus.[8]
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology#Christianity
 
Phoenyx said:
I have no idea what Perry knows about christianity. However, for anyone who doesn't know about Soteriology, and Christian Soteriology in particular, Wikipedia has an entry for that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology


Its introduction to Soteriology:
**
Soteriology (/soʊˌtɪriˈɒlədʒi/; Greek: σωτηρία sōtēria "salvation" from σωτήρ sōtēr "savior, preserver" and λόγος logos "study" or "word"[1]) is the study of religious doctrines of salvation. Salvation theory occupies a place of special significance in many religions. In the academic field of religious studies, soteriology is understood by scholars as representing a key theme in a number of different religions and is often studied in a comparative context; that is, comparing various ideas about what salvation is and how it is obtained.
**

The part of the article that deals with Christian Soteriology in particular:
**
In Christianity, salvation, also called "deliverance" or "redemption", is the saving of human beings from sin and its consequences.[4][5] Variant views on salvation are among the main lines dividing the various Christian denominations, being a point of disagreement between Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, as well as within Protestantism, notably in the Calvinist–Arminian debate. These lines include conflicting definitions of depravity, predestination, atonement, and most pointedly, justification. Christian soteriology ranges from exclusive salvation[6]: p.123  to universal reconciliation[7] concepts.

While some of the differences are as widespread as Christianity itself, the overwhelming majority agrees that salvation is made possible by the life, crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus.[8]
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology#Christianity
Click to expand...

you seem to have overlooked the JPP stamp of approval.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
improve your own.....no one said you did......you said no one had done it before Irenaeus did.....I said it was a lie....and then I proved it....

your memory is not my problem.....my source is in the link you refuse to read because you're afraid you'll be tainted by fact......deal with it.....


no atheist is reputable.....sorry...



your loss.....



the source isn't, be that as it may I realize you only read atheist and agnostic sources.......your problem not mine.....

thanks for the debate.....it was fun until you surrendered.......at least everyone else now realizes the truth......
Click to expand...

If you want to believe the gospels were authored by two apostles and two companions of apostles, that's fine.

It's fun to speculate, and it would be great if it were true. I myself do not categorically rule out that the Christian folklore and tradition about the authors might be true.

But there are way too many things that don't add up to accept the tradition, sight unseen.

Why do none of the authors identify themselves?

If Mathew was writing a firsthand eyewitness account, why did he need to rely on Mark and the lost Gospel of Q for source material?

How did a peasant fisherman from the Aramaic-speaking backwater province of Galilee think up, articulate sophisticated literary and philosophical ideas and compose them in classical Hellenistic Greek?

If John and Matthew are eyewitness accounts, why are their gospels fundamentally different from each other?

Why did it take until the second century for the names Mark Mathew Luke John to be actually added to the gospels?
 
Cypress said:
If you want to believe the gospels were authored by two apostles and two companions of apostles, that's fine.

It's fun to speculate, and it would be great if it were true. I myself do not categorically rule out that the Christian folklore and tradition about the authors might be true.

But there are way too many things that don't add up to accept the tradition, sight unseen.

Why do none of the authors identify themselves?

If Mathew was writing a firsthand eyewitness account, why did he need to rely on Mark and the lost Gospel of Q for source material?

How did a peasant fisherman from the Aramaic-speaking backwater province of Galilee think up, articulate sophisticated literary and philosophical ideas and compose them in classical Hellenistic Greek?

If John and Matthew are eyewitness accounts, why are their gospels fundamentally different from each other?

Why did it take until the second century for the names Mark Mathew Luke John to be actually added to the gospels?
Click to expand...

It's impossible to understand the Bible without the help of the Holy Spirit!
 
Phoenyx said:
Come now Matt, didn't you ever watch Bambi :-p? For those who haven't, Thumper learned a valuable lesson in it, can be seen here :-)...

In all seriousness though, it's one thing to offer constructive criticism of a thread, quite another to just piss on it.
Click to expand...

Shit thread deserves a San Francisco-style junkie style dump right in the middle of it. :fu:


kennypower-FU.gif
 
Defender of Honor said:
I understand not believing! I don't understand going out of your way to deny God,because you don't understand the Bible,and put your faith in men's spin.
Click to expand...

Actually you'll find that many of us atheists have read the bible front to back. I'm not always sure Christians have done so.

Many of us actually DO understand the bible quite well. And many of us realize that since the Bible was written by humans it contains "men's spin" integrally.
 
Matt Dillon said:
Cypress is on a mission to deny God because he likes something deviant that he knows God doesn't.

Such is the case for many atheists.
Click to expand...

I've seen a LOT of Christians who seem to like doing deviant things to offend God. Especially on this forum. Most atheists at least are honest enough to come right out and declare that they don't really believe God is real.
 
Phoenyx said:
I have no idea what Perry knows about christianity. However, for anyone who doesn't know about Soteriology, and Christian Soteriology in particular, Wikipedia has an entry for that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology


Its introduction to Soteriology:
**
Soteriology (/soʊˌtɪriˈɒlədʒi/; Greek: σωτηρία sōtēria "salvation" from σωτήρ sōtēr "savior, preserver" and λόγος logos "study" or "word"[1]) is the study of religious doctrines of salvation. Salvation theory occupies a place of special significance in many religions. In the academic field of religious studies, soteriology is understood by scholars as representing a key theme in a number of different religions and is often studied in a comparative context; that is, comparing various ideas about what salvation is and how it is obtained.
**

The part of the article that deals with Christian Soteriology in particular:
**
In Christianity, salvation, also called "deliverance" or "redemption", is the saving of human beings from sin and its consequences.[4][5] Variant views on salvation are among the main lines dividing the various Christian denominations, being a point of disagreement between Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, as well as within Protestantism, notably in the Calvinist–Arminian debate. These lines include conflicting definitions of depravity, predestination, atonement, and most pointedly, justification. Christian soteriology ranges from exclusive salvation[6]: p.123  to universal reconciliation[7] concepts.

While some of the differences are as widespread as Christianity itself, the overwhelming majority agrees that salvation is made possible by the life, crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Jesus.[8]
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soteriology#Christianity
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying what the words mean. That way the Christians on the forum will know what we are talking about.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
Actually you'll find that many of us atheists have read the bible front to back. I'm not always sure Christians have done so.

Many of us actually DO understand the bible quite well. And many of us realize that since the Bible was written by humans it contains "men's spin" integrally.
Click to expand...

What a joke! You claim to understand the Bible but are an atheist! Proving my point without the Holy Spirit you can't truly understand the Bible
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top