The Bible.... Myth, Real, or Both?

[popper]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

[a danl]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

well said . tim is grasping for straws that don't exist ...noone here can help except the Holy Spirit..

[1hole]

maybe im the only one who thinks it but if i was a clever creator making a sorting process for the afterlife. finding out who will blindly follow something with no proof and repeat whatever I tell them and rage wars over it forever seems like an easy test for exclusion. people say theres traps, but don't consider that they are looking at it..

There is such a "creator", his name is Allah.

[a danl]

That is still the Bible not some other document and it is hear say not eyewitness testimony. How come there is no one saying. "I saw Jesus after he was put in the tomb? We only have second hand accounts and only from his disciples and not from say the Romans or the Pharisees. Testimony for a skeptic is more powerful and from a disciple. A disciple has a motive to lie. It is a fact that Peter is a documented liar, he denied knowing Jesus three times.

Tim

tim, if another document was to come along , you wouldn't believe that either , so what's the point tim? all you're doing is creating havoc , i'm saying so-long

[popper]

The Bible explicitly states that the Trinity is the creator (Master of the Universe) that makes the 'rules', disobedience has consequences. Acceptance of the Trinity relieves the consequences. The Bible also states that there are forces (and people) that are against the Trinity (man made 'rules'?). The Bible then goes on to give examples of the rules, errors and consequences. I have no problem with discussions and thoughts (interpretations) of language & 'historical' details.

[bmortell]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

I cant agree with any of that really. the alternative to the bible is the laws of physics. its the best explanation of everything we got, we call things a theory until they are proven, and update the model when its wrong. if something is unknown the simplest answer that requires the smallest step is the best place to start testing.
people have always attributed some supernatural explanation to things that are outside of their current knowledge and then the laws of physics explains it. for example before the microscope was invented people were dumbfounded on how a jar of water could develop creatures swimming in it if you let it sit sealed on your desk for a while. so people thought things like god must be seeding life in this spot, no other way it got in my sealed jar. same thing with the sun, rain, bad seas, thinking people are witches, you name it. a simple answer has been found for all of them one after another. most of peoples disagreement with religion would be settled if religious people were willing to call things a theory instead of using god as proof of fact on everything they don't know.

and being religious or not has nothing to do with a person being good or bad, so far every person ive met with narcissistic personality disorder, pedophilia and some weird thing for punishing children have all been very openly catholic people. theres plenty of garbage people around without calling them on a side.

[Rizzo]

Roadie, first off, thanks for answering my questions and sharing your views/beliefs.

I'm not on the same page as you but like reading different views on things discussed here.
Some people here get rattled and I suspect feel somewhat threatened to some degree when opposing views are stated.
It's obvious from some of their comments.
But, on the whole, they mean well and are trying to get you and others to "see the light", their way.

....
It's been said that god wrote the bible, not true. Man wrote it, man put his interpretation of things into it many times over the course of history. Sure, it can be argued that it contains god's thoughts and these people just recorded them, but there are many, many people who have others living in their heads due to many different things. Some of those people haven't been the nicest ones you could meet. I have no idea how many translations have been done, more than a few I think.

Yes, the translation thing.
I think it was, what...300 years after Christ when the Bible was written?
I can't help but think that things were forgotten or passed on verbally time after time to the point of introducing some......errors.
Then, there is the language barrier of the original text (Aramaic, Greek?) that needed to be translated to modern day languages. Certainly more room for error there.
Overall though, it is what we have and is full of good stuff and is a historical document as well.

I really don't know what I am, never cared enough to label my beliefs as atheist, or whatever other labels there are. I believe we live and die like any other critter on Earth has for eons. Then we go back to the Earth in whatever form, ashes, bug food......except for the ones who get frozen, mind you, a power failure could raise havoc with their plans on that deal. I think Heaven is the result of man's abject terror on realizing he is not immortal........what if? It sounds much more like someone playing the odds, grabbing at straws, than a true belief in an afterlife and a Heaven.

Yes, labels.....I do not much care for them either.
I can see where, for someone that does not believe in God, one could have that view about heaven.
"Fire and Brimstone" was the mantra that threatened non-believers back "then" and to some degree today.

I also believe that being as this Earth is here, other possibilities most certainly exist, though I don't buy into the Creation thing. More likely a couple of rocks crashed into each other and the Earth was born after a few billion years and the cooking of the needed ingredients delivered the critters, including man. I have no idea where the rocks came from and I really don't care, some things are just what they are. But certainly, possibilities do exist for other life forms, other planets......maybe we all just vaporize into space and join up with all the other energy out there.

The problem with that view is that the rocks had to have come from somewhere.
What was the origin?
Perhaps remnants from the Big Bang Theory? Which then brings up the question of where did the elements that exploded come from.
Some say Life is just a dream. Hmmmm,....could be.
I marvel at all the different plant life, bugs, animals, etc., each with their own physiology and complexities.
Just the "mechanics" of our sensory system of seeing, feeling, etc.. It's mind blowing.
I just see "Intelligent Design" everywhere. I just cannot see where this all just happened by itself.
I see it as God's Creation.

From there things get crazy with all of the different man made religions that state one thing or another.
A lot conflicting with each other, which adds to the confusion for one trying to settle in on what to believe.

[roadie]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

Your post is foolish and illogical. I have met no non-believers who get all bent outa shape like believers do. I have met some fellas who believe, and talk about nasty if you don't agree with them, they'll show you all about nasty right now.....well, try to anyway. It's like you gored their ox, or kicked their dog or something. Every non believer I've met has the attitude of "live and let live", don't kick my dog, I won't kick yours. Sure, there are extremists on either side, but you don't get to tar them all with the same brush.

This thread is about opinions of the bible and it ain't the non believers getting all upset by the opinions being put forth. Another thing, you don't have to be a believer to be "good", you don't have to be a believer to love someone and mourn the loss of them till the very day you die. Saying anything else that besmirches good people is just an example of the hubris, and arrogance that believers project very openly and often. They're one of the reasons for non believers, cause who would want to believe in something that turns them into an arrogant fool.

[1hole]

Actually there are no historical records of the deaths of the Apostles to prove that they died Martyrs or even that they were persecuted. There are only stories and legends. There are historical records that the Romans did persecute Christians and it is not unlikely that the Apostles were Martyred but there are no contemporary records only stories and legends.

Actually, specially about the historical records, you're wrong again. Every historical account ever dug up could easily be deemed "stories and legends" and tossed aside by "smart" people like yourself but deeming something doesn't make it so. Truth is, there have been literally thousands of bits of old writings found in and around the Holy Land. After due scholastic examination and comparison, not one clearly identified fragment has contradicted scripture.

So, again I ask, what evidence do you require to make a historical account of anything believable? No one questions the existence of good ol' Harry Stottle the Greek but we only have a few scraps of anything he wrote while there are tens of thousands for the Bible. So .... maybe we're not too dumm to stick with what makes sense?

The Romans kept many records but it does not seem that the Apostles were of particular note to the Roman Leadership. Christianity at the time of the Apostles was so very tiny a population.

Yes, the Romans kept records of a lot of things, including their years of massive persecutions of the tiny but growing sect known as Christians. But, if you say Josephus wasn't a certified Jewish/Roman historian you might be right ... except it's well known that ol' Joe was exactly that and HE recorded much of what's in scripture at that time. Sure, Joe could have written Greek-type stories and legends but many of his contemporaries would have known it at the time and exposed him as a lier; none did so.


Tim, I find it interesting that you again take off in different directions with misdirection rabbit trail questions but you don't bother to address the single direct question about what motives you think led the disciples to "lie" about their experiences with the risen Lord Jesus. So, I ask again, "What motive do you think caused them to lie themselves to death?"

The disciples couldn't know the details of their coming persecution but they sure knew it was to come (John 16:2). They, all of them but John, went to their (recorded) grizzly deaths rather than recant. Do you deem all of their amply recorded (separate, but unanimous) courage while enduring painful deaths to protect irrelevant stories and legends of a (pointless) group lie?

[popper]

Your post is foolish and illogical Actually my post is exactly what the Bible says. It may seem illogical to what man thinks. Agreed that some with 'religious' fever and attitude can be obnoxious and harmful. Bible states that. If you've read the Bible and understand it, why gripe about the 'religious' actions of others? My comment was NONE of us is good, not that I look down on non-believers.

[EDG]

Actually you have no answer other than waving around your bible.
The human race did without all of that for about 100,000 years and the New World did without it another 1492 years. Then look what happened to the New World when the christians set foot on land. Disease, theft and plunder... Nice bunch of Catholics they were.

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

[exile]

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away." Matthew 24:35 (NASB)

[dtknowles]

tim, if another document was to come along , you wouldn't believe that either , so what's the point tim? all you're doing is creating havoc , i'm saying so-long

If another document was to come along I would likely believe it if it had proper providence. Actually even if it did not have proper providence I might value it as corroboration of the New Testament. You seem to misunderstand. I am not saying that all of the Bible is lies. I am saying that before I believe that Jesus rose from the dead and is thus the Christ I will need evidence other than the Bible. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence not wishful thinking. The miraculous claim that our sins will be forgiven for merely following the words of Jesus is too good to be true. It would seem to me than anyone who believes that is gullible and his salvation is at risk because he might not have worked hard enough to wipe out his sins and make proper amends. If my creating havoc saves some souls then I have done good. Jesus said go and sin no more and he should have add and go and make amends for the harm you have done.

Tim

[1hole]

I think it was, what...300 years after Christ when the Bible was written?

That's not even close.

The list of writings we know as the Old Testament was established by the Jews about 400 years before Jesus' birth. The writings that eventually became the New Testament started appearing quite soon after the resurrection, along with a lot of other religious books. Some of those originally under consideration were spacy philosophical musings, some were outright religious forgeries, a few were written in the 400 year "quite period" between the Testaments. And the true ones. Only those books that survived a lengthy and rigorous examination by serious and Godly men were included in the canon.

In 325 AD, Rome's then emperor, Constantine, called for a convocation of prominent Christian leaders at Nicea, in today's west Turkey, to deal with several major questions in a hope for religious unity; it almost worked. The attendees eventually came to a majority agreement on the already widely known (not brand new) books that would eventually become the N.T. but the canon itself wasn't fully established until about a hundred years later. Ergo, no part of the Bible as we know it was "written" at Nicea in 300 A.D., but Constantine himself had little impact on which books were chosen or rejected from inclusion in the new canon.

I have a hard time keeping a straight face when I hear complaints over the supposed evils of different Bible "translations" (and "versions"). For goodness sake, the originals were written in Greek, Aramaic (the language of Jesus) and Hebrew - and not 1611 King James English either - none of us can read that! The unusual grammar of different languages demands that any translation be a version. There simply isn't any way a transliterated Bible - i.e., a straight translation, word for word - that some folk think they want could be comprehended.

[popper]

I will make an assumption about Tim. I assume he really is an atheist - stick with me. As an atheist, he believes the Bible is untrue(lie). But he uses it to try to 'prove' it is a lie. That is a logic fallacy, like you learned, double negative. Prove my point, 'the moon is made of cheese'. You cannot prove my statement is false based on only that statement. There is NO reliable source to discount the Bible! The Bible speaks of the Resurrection of Jesus and there is NO evidence that is a lie.
Tim has stated recently he is a Theist. All 'religions' of the world (past and present) claim a 'god', therefore are Theist. From Molak to Satan and intersteller thinkers. There is really no difference between Theist and Deists; aka, Buddha, Shintō, Hindi and Confucius.
Ancient Hebrew is an elementary/non-specific written language which is very contextual in form, believed to be an 'accumulation of the mid-east languages - now believed to be started in the Baltic region. I.e. 'words' have varied meanings depending on context usage. Greek (which Jesus spoke fluently) was more specific. Latin even more so. Actually true English is one of the MOST specific - discounting the colloquialisms.

[Rizzo]

I will make an assumption about Tim. I assume he really is an atheist - stick with me. As an atheist, he believes the Bible is untrue(lie). But he uses it to try to 'prove' it is a lie. That is a logic fallacy, like you learned, double negative. Prove my point, 'the moon is made of cheese'. You cannot prove my statement is false based on only that statement. There is NO reliable source to discount the Bible! The Bible speaks of the Resurrection of Jesus and there is NO evidence that is a lie.
Tim has stated recently he is a Theist. All 'religions' of the world (past and present) claim a 'god', therefore are Theist. From Molak to Satan and intersteller thinkers. There is really no difference between Theist and Deists; aka, Buddha, Shintō, Hindi and Confucius.
Ancient Hebrew is an elementary/non-specific written language which is very contextual in form, believed to be an 'accumulation of the mid-east languages - now believed to be started in the Baltic region. I.e. 'words' have varied meanings depending on context usage. Greek (which Jesus spoke fluently) was more specific. Latin even more so. Actually true English is one of the MOST specific - discounting the colloquialisms.

What's your point?
This Forum has members with different views and beliefs and we discuss them here.
It makes it interesting to read other's viewpoints doesn't it?

Because he (DTKnowles - Tim) doesn't believe what you do seems to bother you and others.
I find it rather amusing actually.
He has stated he is not a Christian but does believe in God.
So what?

This Forum isn't just for Christians.
It would be rather boring here if everyone just posted Chapter and Verse now wouldn't it.

[popper]

Only that Tim has been arguing for better than a year that the Bible is not true, with NO justifiable evidence. Just pointing out that his logic in his arguments is a failure. He obviously considers it made up fiction. His opinion, his problem. My opinion, kinda like gun opposition, no real facts, just opinion. Actually the other problem for believers, he is promoting an anti-God thesis.
I won't comment more.

[dtknowles]

Only that Tim has been arguing for better than a year that the Bible is not true, with NO justifiable evidence. Just pointing out that his logic in his arguments is a failure. He obviously considers it made up fiction. His opinion, his problem. My opinion, kinda like gun opposition, no real facts, just opinion. Actually the other problem for believers, he is promoting an anti-God thesis.
I won't comment more.

I believe in God, there is but one God. The creator of all things.

I don't believe parts of the Bible. I did not say the Bible is all lies, some parts of it are clearly not the literal truth, they are parables and other parts are so fantastic that I can't believe them without more evidence.

I think the people who accept the bible as the truth are naïve. I don't believe in miracles. I believe God achieves what God wants using the forces of nature God designed. Of course God understands and can control the forces of nature in ways we can't and can't understand.

Tim

[dtknowles]

I will make an assumption about Tim. I assume he really is an atheist.

Tim has stated recently he is a Theist. All 'religions' of the world (past and present) claim a 'god', therefore are Theist. From Molak to Satan and intersteller thinkers. There is really no difference between Theist and Deists...…………...

You acknowledge my claim to be a Theist but go on and assume I am an Atheist. I assure you I believe in God and while I don't condemn Atheists for their lack of belief in God, I do condemn them it the are immoral. Right and wrong are independent of God.

Regarding "There is really no difference between Theist and Deists." Seriously they are very different.

theist
[ˈTHēist]

NOUN
a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe.

deist
[ˈdēist, ˈdāist]

DEFINITION
noun

a person who believes in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe.

Do you see the difference now?

Christians are theists.


Tim

[a danl]

You will have to point me to them because I have looked for other eyewitness accounts of Jesus resurrection and have not found any. Even the Bible does not have a eyewitness account of the actual resurrection only an empty tomb second hand stories about Jesus appearing to people after he had died.

Tim

tim , what about the dead sea scrolls ? they are other documents that clearly reference isaiah