How Many Here Have Even Read The Bible?

dkst0426

Byrnzie wrote:

You have completely missed the point.
There is no historical evidence that Jesus existed at the time he is said to have lived. Not one iota of historical, or archaelogical evidence. In fact, all of the research which has taken place in the pusuit of historical evidence to support the events mentioned in the bible points to these events having taken place at approximately 1000 - 15000bc.
Check out: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Christianity-Egyptian-Religion-Ahmed-Osman/dp/1591430461/sr=1-4/qid=1160384748/ref=sr_1_4/026-8449191-6268465?ie=UTF8&s=books

No, you missed MY point.

Secondly, the apocryphal "gospels" not being canonized had nothing to do with them not being able to 'verify' them. The canonical scriptures - those deemed acceptable by the early church fathers - were themselves unverifiable. The reason that the apocryphal books were deemed heretical is simply because they preached direct access to, and experience of, God, without the meduim of the preisthood and the church. Put simply, it came down to power politics.

Sure--if you want to look at it from that point of view and discredit all other views.

Edit: My attitude has always been 'fuck the church!'

Yes, that is rather evident.

dkst0426

danika_bookworm wrote:

oh, man, same for me, it gets really impersonal with all the public rituals without applying what these religious rituals really symbolize.

Applying what the rituals are and symbolize falls squarely in the believer's court, not in the institution's court.

redrock

Milestone wrote:

I'm still waiting for a new and relevant installment of the Bible to be written.

Heresy!!!! :eek:

MetalGod75

my opinion?
FUCK RELIGION:)
i dont wanna be saved:)

redrock

dkst0426 wrote:

Sure--if you want to look at it from that point of view and discredit all other views.

Documented, historical facts on how the bible was put together is enough. No need for 'point of view' etc. Facts....

dkst0426

redrock wrote:

Historical/archeological/scientific research are proving 'facts' of the bible not to be accurate or even completely wrong (timelines not matching, scientific explanations and timings for 'miracles'.. etc.)

Oh really? Care to cite some examples?

redrock

dkst0426 wrote:

Oh really? Care to cite some examples?

Can't be bothered researching details but science explained the parting of the seas, the destruction of sodom & gomorrah, Lazarus & more. If you wish to look into things, the bible speaks of historical figures/events that, following archeological discoveries, are 'out of synch'. If I had the time I would get the details, but it seems that some people are not interested in facts and would rather see the bible as an all knowing, all sacred book, etc..... "Avoiding these facts, ignoring them, or denying them only hurts the cause of Christianity among people who wonder if Christianity is relevant for today." These are facts that Christians must acknowledge and deal with if they do want to stay credible.

bubbamackdaddy69

I've never read 1 sentence of it...Looked at it though in the drawers of the nightstand hotels..lol

dkst0426

redrock wrote:

Can't be bothered researching details but science explained the parting of the seas, the destruction of sodom & gomorrah, Lazarus & more. If you wish to look into things, the bible speaks of historical figures/events that, following archeological discoveries, are 'out of synch'. If I had the time I would get the details, but it seems that some people are not interested in facts and would rather see the bible as an all knowing, all sacred book, etc..... "Avoiding these facts, ignoring them, or denying them only hurts the cause of Christianity among people who wonder if Christianity is relevant for today." These are facts that Christians must acknowledge and deal with if they do want to stay credible.

You can't be bothered to research details, and you're trying to lecture us on what Christians must acknowledge and deal with to stay credible? The very reason I asked is not borne out of a view of the Bible as some "all knowing all sacred book etc." It's to see with more detail where you're coming from.

"For nearly a century, there has been speculation that the Red Sea mentioned in Exodus is not the huge 100-mile-wide expanse as it is known today, but the western 'finger' of the Red Sea--which is now called the Gulf of Suez--that extends to the border areas of Egypt. This notion stems from the fact that the original Hebrew phrase for Red Sea was 'yam suph,' which actually means 'Reed Sea.' This phrase most aptly describes the lake region north of the Gulf of Suez, including the Bitter Lakes and Lake Timsah. According to the account in Exodus of Moses's feat, enough water was present initially to block the fleeing Israelites, and then later to drown the pursuing Egyptians. "Assuming all of that is true, researchers believe that a logical location for the biblical Red Sea is modern-day Lake Sirbonis. According to a 'Bulletin Of The American Meteorological Society' account, computer calculations indicate that because of the peculiar geography of the northern end of the Red Sea, a moderate wind blowing constantly for about 10 hours could have caused the sea to recede about a mile and the water level to drop 10 ft., leaving dry land for a period of time before crashing back when the winds died down."
- Mike Fillon, "Science Solves the Ancient Mysteries of the Bible", Popular Mechanics, Dec. 1996

Biblical plagues and parting of Red Sea 'caused by volcano'

That's one.

Is there any evidence for the Biblical story of Sodom and Gomorrah's destruction by fire and brimstone (sulfur)?

Two.

redrock

dkst0426 wrote:

You can't be bothered to research details, and you're trying to lecture us on what Christians must acknowledge and deal with to stay credible? The very reason I asked is not borne out of a view of the Bible as some "all knowing all sacred book etc." It's to see with more detail where you're coming from.


Biblical plagues and parting of Red Sea 'caused by volcano'

That's one.

Not lecturing anyone.... scientific evidence is there, and has been there for quite a while. Even the pope has acknowledged some of these. I can't be bothered to do the research because I would have to go through a number of my books and notes....or google. Looks like you can google, anyone can do that.... google your little heart out.... I'm sure there will be loads of sites that will either acknowledge the science, completely ignore it, sites that will debunk the bible and others that will confirm all writings as fact..... Each one can find what he wants. I studied the bible over many years, I heard many arguments from a very wide range of people. Doesn't make me an expert, doesn't make me want to lecture or ram my thoughts on this book down people's throat. I just stated a fact without going deeper into it. That's all.. do what you want with it.

dkst0426

redrock wrote:

I'm sure there will be loads of sites that will either acknowledge the science, completely ignore it, sites that will debunk the bible and others that will confirm all writings as fact..... Each one can find what he wants.

That's it, isn't it?

redrock

dkst0426 wrote:

That's it, isn't it?

Sure.. that's what these books of stories, myths and legends are all about. Maybe also a bit like Nostradamus' Prophecies. Read what you want into them... Want to believe the stories, that's up to you. Don't want to believe in them, that's fine too. Each to his/her own.

dkst0426

redrock wrote:

Sure.. that's what these books of stories, myths and legends are all about. Maybe also a bit like Nostradamus' Prophecies. Read what you want into them... Want to believe the stories, that's up to you. Don't want to believe in them, that's fine too. Each to his/her own.

Hell, you could say the same about a textbook, depending on which ones you read for the same subject.

redrock

dkst0426 wrote:

Hell, you could say the same about a textbook, depending on which ones you read for the same subject.

Absolutely... you can say that for anything really. A news story... depending which 'side' recounts the event, it will be different. Though scientifi advances, mathematics, etc. are generally accepted as proven (not just proven but verified). Part of my early schooling was done in France.. I studied Napoleon - a heroic figure in France (well, in those days). I moved to Belgium the following year (less than 1hr drive away!). Studied Napoleon again.. same facts.. different opinions - he was a loser there! Just an example...

brainofPJ

redrock wrote:

Absolutely... you can say that for anything really. A news story... depending which 'side' recounts the event, it will be different. Though scientifi advances, mathematics, etc. are generally accepted as proven (not just proven but verified). Part of my early schooling was done in France.. I studied Napoleon - a heroic figure in France (well, in those days). I moved to Belgium the following year (less than 1hr drive away!). Studied Napoleon again.. same facts.. different opinions - he was a loser there! Just an example...

there's more evidence of jesus and things happening in the bible than there is that napoleon ever existed

redrock

brainofPJ wrote:

there's more evidence of jesus and things happening in the bible than there is that napoleon ever existed

You are joking, aren't you? :eek:

Ahnimus

You guys still argueing about this. Don't you know the Annunaki rule the world and made up religion to keep the masses in order.

redrock

Aahhh... the fallen angels... I love angels and angel stories!

brainofPJ

redrock wrote:

You are joking, aren't you? :eek:

uhh, no...i believe you are

redrock

brainofPJ wrote:

uhh, no...i believe you are

ok.... ummm.... if you say so....