Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 142

Thread: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

  1. #61
    Far Rider
    Guest

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    Quote Originally Posted by memebias
    And this is what scares the crap out of me regarding religion and some of its followers. You admit it is awful, but as long as the mass slaughter of innocent women and children is by Divine Command, you will accept it. Presumably you accept the killing of innocents by devotees of other religions with the same equanimity.

    The Unknown Purpose theodicy effectively means you are abandoning the notion of gods omnibenevolence. If your god commands the murder of innocents for reasons unknown to us, then what grounds do you have for judging him to be morally good? Making that determination requires at least some understanding of his motives and intent. To be consistent you would have to say that you do not know definitely whether your god is good or evil because he works in mysterious ways.



    I don't want any kind of "special dispensation", just some logical, coherent reasons to believe.



    If your righteous killer did come back from the dead, then I'd have to stop believing that both you and I were inevitably going to be worm food, and take christianity a bit more seriously.



    I don't believe it Far Rider because from the outside it comes across as an illogical incoherent religion based around belief in one Bronze Age deity.
    Of course, if you have some valid reasons for me to believe in the existence of the Christian god based on verifiable facts rather than your personal belief, I'd love to hear them, and once you have provided these verifiable facts and I wilfully decline to accept them without giving a reason, then you can accuse me of not believing because I don't want to believe.




    Thank you.
    You know I just wasnt there when Joshua did those things, I know today Im not nor is anyone being told to kill in Gods name.

    I have valid personal reasons to believe. You have valid personal and apparently many different evedinces to not believe, thats cool with me. I wouldnt try to convince you at all.


    Have a nice life.

  2. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    67
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    01:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    I take the word of the bible to heart actually. The message of the New Testament is a positive one, its just I don't like the Roman Catholic Church's handling of Christianity or what has happened to the original gospels. I generally dislike organised religion, and I feel that although I am an agnostic I share some of your most cherished beliefs in the human race, the capacity for forgiveness, the ability to love... I'm in love at the moment so...

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gabriola Island BC
    Posts
    5,645
    Local Date
    08-24-2019
    Local Time
    05:17 PM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    memebias

    Whose interpretation? Which one is correct? etc.

    There have been relatively unbiased as well as unbiased scholars down through the centuries. One can ultimately believe what one wants. However in interpreting the Bible--trying to get gack to what the authors intended requires a lot of study: the language of the day, the culture of the day, the history to that point, the then fund of knowledge that they had, their conceptualization ability, style of writing, the audience for which it was written, the purpose for when it was written we can come very close to what the authors meant. Believing what they say as a matter of faith is just that. Add to the above list a good dose of good reasoning and we get even closer. Such interpretations are not done just on the spur of the moment but after a great deal of research and discussion with fellow scholars. If you do not understand the style of writing (midrash) then you will get anything from anywhere and everywhere.

    Now we are able to compare the Biblical accounts with the archaeological evidence. There are also extral Biblical writings that do help. It seems to me that one should not only read the Bible but also what the great scholars have said down through the years. We ought to make use of the knowledge they have acquired.

    Once you have done this, and made use of some of the excellent commentaries you will come to realize that only in some minds is the Bible illogical and incoherent.

    As an extra note the Old Testament must be read in light of the New Testament. When you suggest that the modern liberals have as much trouble as the inerrants when it comes to interpreting I cannot agree though the inerrants would argue that point vociferously.

    Shalom
    Ted

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gabriola Island BC
    Posts
    5,645
    Local Date
    08-24-2019
    Local Time
    05:17 PM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    memebias

    The kind of validating proof that you seek, stand up in court etc. does not exist. Nor does it need to.

    We have the witnesses of millions of folks down through the millenia. They have been witnesses to their own experiences and those of others in terms of the Christian faith.

    We also have the witness of millions of Christians alive today in the world. They to have had their experiences of the Divine and what they have seen.

    I personally have experienced the Divine in several issues throughout my life. I have witnessed miracles that at unquestionable even for the doctors. I have no need to prove to anyone what I know

    I am of course a pluralist Christian
    Shalom
    Ted

    Have to do this fast as the winds are picking up and we will probably lose our power soon.

  5. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    76
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    01:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    Thank you for your reply Ted.

    There have been relatively unbiased as well as unbiased scholars down through the centuries. One can ultimately believe what one wants. However in interpreting the Bible--trying to get gack to what the authors intended requires a lot of study: the language of the day, the culture of the day, the history to that point, the then fund of knowledge that they had, their conceptualization ability, style of writing, the audience for which it was written, the purpose for when it was written we can come very close to what the authors meant. Believing what they say as a matter of faith is just that. Add to the above list a good dose of good reasoning and we get even closer.
    I’ve read a lot from all sides of the apologetic argument Ted, from conservative and liberal biblical apologetics to the sceptical arguments. It seems your position is closest to that of Bultmann, and his use of Form Criticism to demythologize the bible as a 1st century world view obscuring the essential truth behind the bible.

    Such interpretations are not done just on the spur of the moment but after a great deal of research and discussion with fellow scholars. If you do not understand the style of writing (midrash) then you will get anything from anywhere and everywhere.
    I’m acquainted with midrash Ted, and its use in the Bible, and its superficial forms are usually easy to spot. Jesus/Moses, parting of various seas/rivers etc. But because of its use, we are inevitably led to the position where we have to question the motives of the New Testament writers. Are they writing something that can at any stage be considered remotely historically accurate? Are parts of their writings used as a vehicle to artificially fulfil Old Testament prophesy, as in Mark? Or is it clearly midrashic, as in the case of Herod’s murder of the new born children?

    For the best part of two thousand years devout Christians have taken the bible as god’s revealed truth, in that all parts of the bible not obviously of an allegorical nature are based on fact. Can it be that god would deceive his people for that length of time if they are free to “believe what one wants”?

    “Statements affirming particular facts may be found to have value as pictorial expressions of spiritual truths, even though the supposed facts themselves do not actually happen.”
    Anglican Church Commission on Christian Doctrine, 1938.

    There must come a stage when even the most liberal of Christian interpreters of the bible must say “This is the truth, not spiritually true, not metaphorically true, but an objective fact”. Where is that point Ted? I don’t expect the thousands of Christian denominations to be in lock-step over every doctrinal point, but what are the issues that are universally held as the literal truth?

    Now we are able to compare the Biblical accounts with the archaeological evidence. There are also extral Biblical writings that do help. It seems to me that one should not only read the Bible but also what the great scholars have said down through the years. We ought to make use of the knowledge they have acquired.
    Have you any particular archaeological evidence and extra biblical writings in mind Ted?

    Please understand, my questions are not intended to attack or undermine any particular denomination of the Christian faith. I have a genuine desire to understand the motivations that various believers have for holding their faith, an attempt to try to comprehend what, to me, is incomprehensible.

  6. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    76
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    01:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    The kind of validating proof that you seek, stand up in court etc. does not exist. Nor does it need to.

    We have the witnesses of millions of folks down through the millenia. They have been witnesses to their own experiences and those of others in terms of the Christian faith.
    The Appeal to Numbers argument rarely works Ted because it often raises more questions than it answers. If Christianity and the Christian god is valid due to the number of its followers, and no other proof is required, does this mean it would be reasonable to claim that when Christianity was a small sect in Judea, the existence of Mithras could be taken as proven - without the need for further evidence - because it could be shown that he was worshipped from one end of the Roman Empire to the other and beyond? If a deity’s existence is based on having the largest number of followers, what happens to that deity if/when that religion is no longer the largest?

  7. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Rhine-Westphalia
    Posts
    554
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    02:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius
    1. I don't like the Roman Catholic Church's handling of Christianity...

    2. ...or what has happened to the original gospels.
    1. OK

    2. Well, G, I don't wanna be a pest about this, but you haven't presented the slightest evidence that the original gospels have been compromised for what you have claimed (in earlier posts) to have been political purposes. I've pointed this out several times now, and you have not responded except by repeating the charge. How about some evidence from credible sources?

  8. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    67
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    01:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    Well Bronwen, like you I have belief.

    I rationally have decided that the Imperial Court of Rome had thrown out the original gospels for political reason's. Proof for rational conspiracys 1700 years old can be hard to come by, as you can imagine.

    Have you got any idea why they threw out the original gospels (of which there were many)

    Besides all that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are written many years after Jesus.

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Rhine-Westphalia
    Posts
    554
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    02:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius
    1. Well Bronwen, like you I have belief.

    2. I rationally have decided that the Imperial Court of Rome had thrown out the original gospels for political reason's. Proof for rational conspiracys 1700 years old can be hard to come by, as you can imagine.

    3. Have you got any idea why they threw out the original gospels (of which there were many)

    4. Besides all that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are written many years after Jesus.
    1. No, you have DISbelief.

    2. What is the rationale? Why have you decided that? Whim? Whim doesn't cut it. Where is the evidence?

    3. No, that is YOUR idea, not mine, nor were there 'many' original gospels. There were basically two (Mark and John) with some additional material added to Mark by Matthew and Luke.

    4. You were expecting they would be written BEFORE Jesus?

  10. #70
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    67
    Local Date
    08-25-2019
    Local Time
    01:17 AM

    Re: Just how much credibility can we give the Bible as a historical source?

    Register to remove this ad.
    1. No, you have DISbelief.

    2. What is the rationale? Why have you decided that? Whim? Whim doesn't cut it. Where is the evidence?

    3. No, that is YOUR idea, not mine, nor were there 'many' original gospels. There were basically two (Mark and John) with some additional material added to Mark by Matthew and Luke.

    4. You were expecting they would be written BEFORE Jesus?
    1) I have belief in the human race, if you could call that a belief. What I don't believe in is somebody blowing themselves up and killing a bunch of Jews or somebody murdering an abortion clinic worker in the name of God.

    2) Its rationality whether you like it or not Bronwen. The most likely scenario may well be upsetting, but it is the most obvious one. Is not the entire Christian faith a whim, after all?

    3) Really if you continue this pretetense that you enjoy biblical history you are fooling yourself. If you truly belief that there were only ever the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John then I feel sorry for you that Church propaganda has destroyed your mind to the extent that it has.

    4) Not at all. The fact that the gospels were written many years (100 years) after Jesus is a bit worrying. Ever play Chinese Whispers?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Historical fiction
    By Chookie in forum General Chit Chat
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-03-2008, 03:56 PM
  2. Credibility
    By WonderWendy3 in forum Friends, Relationships, & Advice
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-14-2008, 08:16 PM
  3. Most Heinous Historical Event?
    By RedGlitter in forum History
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 10-24-2006, 08:55 PM
  4. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 09:43 AM
  5. Historical Scenes
    By Philadelphia Eagle in forum Photography & More
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-28-2005, 06:44 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts