Jor-el Posted July 5, 2008 #301 Share Posted July 5, 2008 (edited) The lengths people go to stuff the supernatural into a story of dubious and distorted origins.... THe point is that the bible has its faults, I'm the 1st to accept that, I don't believe in an inerrant scripture. What I do believe is that even with those faults we can get a fairly accurate picture of what those people believed. That said, God exists and intervenes in our lives, whether we recognize it or not is another matter. To state the non-existence of the supernatural, is, in a way, to deny the existence of God and that is the foundation that all those who study the scriptures should start with. It is due to this that the majority of "scholars" find such fault with the bible, because of the supernatural element and nothing else. Edited July 5, 2008 by Jor-el Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted July 5, 2008 #302 Share Posted July 5, 2008 Whoa whoa whoa, thats sort of a double standard, Iams. No offense or anything, but I don't think a Christian, who has a set and established belief that the word of the Bible is the inerrant word of God, is exactly 'unbiased' when it comes to studying the historicity of the New Testament. When it comes to Theological matters, of course I would take the word of a Christian over someone else, however, you can't tell me that someone who already believes that: Jesus Christ was the Son of God the Bible is the inerrant Word of God everything that the Bible claims happened, happened etc. etc. Can objectively look at scripture from a historical perspective. The problem is that the Christian (depending on how 'hardcore' he or she is) starts out with his or her conclusion already: that such and such things happened because the Bible says they did. You can't start with your conclusion first and try to prove it, what needs to be done is whoever is studying the content needs to assess the information available and THEN draw a conclusion. If you don't then you end up looking like Kent Hovind or the other guys down at AiG. and if you add in creating meaning where none exists you have the four assumptions the bible is most often interpreted through.......there in lies the problem..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamsSon Posted July 6, 2008 #303 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Whoa whoa whoa, thats sort of a double standard, Iams. No offense or anything, but I don't think a Christian, who has a set and established belief that the word of the Bible is the inerrant word of God, is exactly 'unbiased' when it comes to studying the historicity of the New Testament. When it comes to Theological matters, of course I would take the word of a Christian over someone else, however, you can't tell me that someone who already believes that: Jesus Christ was the Son of God the Bible is the inerrant Word of God everything that the Bible claims happened, happened etc. etc. Can objectively look at scripture from a historical perspective. The problem is that the Christian (depending on how 'hardcore' he or she is) starts out with his or her conclusion already: that such and such things happened because the Bible says they did. You can't start with your conclusion first and try to prove it, what needs to be done is whoever is studying the content needs to assess the information available and THEN draw a conclusion. If you don't then you end up looking like Kent Hovind or the other guys down at AiG. The same can be said for non-Christians church. I mean if you are intent on being assured that Jesus was not real, and if real, not more than a crazy guy with some nice stories, how unbiased are you going to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted July 6, 2008 #304 Share Posted July 6, 2008 THe point is that the bible has its faults, I'm the 1st to accept that, I don't believe in an inerrant scripture. What I do believe is that even with those faults we can get a fairly accurate picture of what those people believed. That said, God exists and intervenes in our lives, whether we recognize it or not is another matter. To state the non-existence of the supernatural, is, in a way, to deny the existence of God and that is the foundation that all those who study the scriptures should start with. It is due to this that the majority of "scholars" find such fault with the bible, because of the supernatural element and nothing else. jorel that is using a biased approach to the bible which is the most common interpretation.. packing into it all the meaning you prefer up front... this leads to dogma not insights... instead of coming to the table free of meaning stepping back this is the methoology that is used in academia...... and the direction we are movng towards cuturally because it is fair and leaves little room for exploitaiton and preying on insecurities....IMO....questioning is natural we would serve our cultrue by encouraging it more.. one's faith doesn't have to be compromised does it according to you yours was strengthened so lets allow others to decide for themselves also......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jor-el Posted July 6, 2008 #305 Share Posted July 6, 2008 (edited) jorel that is using a biased approach to the bible which is the most common interpretation.. packing into it all the meaning you prefer up front... this leads to dogma not insights... instead of coming to the table free of meaning stepping back this is the methoology that is used in academia...... and the direction we are movng towards cuturally because it is fair and leaves little room for exploitaiton and preying on insecurities....IMO....questioning is natural we would serve our cultrue by encouraging it more.. one's faith doesn't have to be compromised does it according to you yours was strengthened so lets allow others to decide for themselves also......... Yes it was, but also because I rejected many arguments to the contrary because I believed in a Supernatural God who can actually do more than is in the bible. Disbelief will always encourage disbelief and the opposite is also true... Edited July 6, 2008 by Jor-el Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamsSon Posted July 6, 2008 #306 Share Posted July 6, 2008 jorel that is using a biased approach to the bible which is the most common interpretation.. packing into it all the meaning you prefer up front... this leads to dogma not insights... instead of coming to the table free of meaning stepping back this is the methoology that is used in academia...... and the direction we are movng towards cuturally because it is fair and leaves little room for exploitaiton and preying on insecurities....IMO....questioning is natural we would serve our cultrue by encouraging it more.. one's faith doesn't have to be compromised does it according to you yours was strengthened so lets allow others to decide for themselves also......... So society is moving toward the acceptance of absolute ignorance as the basis of knowledge... I think Romans 1 talks about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted July 6, 2008 #307 Share Posted July 6, 2008 (edited) So society is moving toward the acceptance of absolute ignorance as the basis of knowledge... I think Romans 1 talks about this. son perhaps if you were confident in your beleif's you would encourage this for others......you can't know what is best for another ...how arrogant of me to say to you should be a nb because I think you should be correct?? welll i wouldn't because i resepct your choices, i think they work for you in a way you can relate and connect the best..... unless you are seeking to be validated by getting another to agree or convert then perhaps this is an opp for you to strengthen your faith correct???? I understand being excited about finding a path that brings out your best or what ever you are using it for..., oh ye of little faith trust that others will find their way also ..... perhaps thats what faith is for to use it focus on your own journey that is where you will do the most benefit and your example will show what you know and perhaps it will touch others, perhaps it won't in a way that works for them or dosent both ways are valuable you know...., you dont get to decide how though son........ you can miss too much when you are only open to seeing others in a way that you agree with... Edited July 6, 2008 by Supra Sheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #308 Share Posted July 6, 2008 The same can be said for non-Christians church. I mean if you are intent on being assured that Jesus was not real, and if real, not more than a crazy guy with some nice stories, how unbiased are you going to be. While there certainly are people who have that mentality, I can only speak for myself when I say that I try not to assume something until I have both the story (subjective) and the facts (objective). I have the story - the Bible, and I have the facts - history, and the story does not match the facts, and as such, I have made my decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted July 6, 2008 #309 Share Posted July 6, 2008 While there certainly are people who have that mentality, I can only speak for myself when I say that I try not to assume something until I have both the story (subjective) and the facts (objective). I have the story - the Bible, and I have the facts - history, and the story does not match the facts, and as such, I have made my decision. http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/paul/j_myth.htm Have a look at this site I just stumbled on it by accident. I will not say anything about it so as not to influence you on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #310 Share Posted July 6, 2008 THe point is that the bible has its faults, I'm the 1st to accept that, I don't believe in an inerrant scripture. What I do believe is that even with those faults we can get a fairly accurate picture of what those people believed. Ok, this I can agree with. That said, God exists and intervenes in our lives, whether we recognize it or not is another matter. To state the non-existence of the supernatural, is, in a way, to deny the existence of God and that is the foundation that all those who study the scriptures should start with. It is due to this that the majority of "scholars" find such fault with the bible, because of the supernatural element and nothing else. And here is where I disagree with you. "God exists and intervenes in our lives" is a HUGELY contentious statement. While I believe in God, I cannot say for sure, with 100% certainty that he/she/it exists, and further more, I would never assert that knowledge of a higher power is necessary to understand religion, its dogma, or how its supposed to work. There are plenty of non-religious people who understand Christianity and Judaism and Islam and yadda yadda yadda. Second of all, a historian does NOT need to be a Theist to study scripture. That is ludicrous. If only people who were Theists were allowed to study the historicity of the Bible then we would still believe that the literal creation happened, that Adam and Eve really existed, etc. etc. etc. If someone is studying scripture in a Theological context, then yes, its probably a good idea to be an adherent to that particular faith, but you could be a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Jew or any other religion and still study the history of the New Testament. You don't need to be a Christian to do that. What makes a non-Christian less qualified to judge, with the evidence, the historicity of Jesus? Oh, and the actual reason there is disagreement among Theist and Nontheist scholars is because the Non-theist scholars recognize that there is not much history to back up the life of Jesus Christ where as a Christian would never admit that Christ's actual life is lost to history, if he indeed ever existed. We don't have first hand accounts of Christs life, we have accounts from the third and fourth generations on, but not from anyone who actually knew him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #311 Share Posted July 6, 2008 http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/paul/j_myth.htm Have a look at this site I just stumbled on it by accident. I will not say anything about it so as not to influence you on it. Interesting find danielost, hopefully I'll read it in full soon. This might be worth starting a topic about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted July 6, 2008 #312 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Ok, this I can agree with. And here is where I disagree with you. "God exists and intervenes in our lives" is a HUGELY contentious statement. While I believe in God, I cannot say for sure, with 100% certainty that he/she/it exists, and further more, I would never assert that knowledge of a higher power is necessary to understand religion, its dogma, or how its supposed to work. There are plenty of non-religious people who understand Christianity and Judaism and Islam and yadda yadda yadda. Second of all, a historian does NOT need to be a Theist to study scripture. That is ludicrous. If only people who were Theists were allowed to study the historicity of the Bible then we would still believe that the literal creation happened, that Adam and Eve really existed, etc. etc. etc. If someone is studying scripture in a Theological context, then yes, its probably a good idea to be an adherent to that particular faith, but you could be a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Jew or any other religion and still study the history of the New Testament. You don't need to be a Christian to do that. What makes a non-Christian less qualified to judge, with the evidence, the historicity of Jesus? Oh, and the actual reason there is disagreement among Theist and Nontheist scholars is because the Non-theist scholars recognize that there is not much history to back up the life of Jesus Christ where as a Christian would never admit that Christ's actual life is lost to history, if he indeed ever existed. We don't have first hand accounts of Christs life, we have accounts from the third and fourth generations on, but not from anyone who actually knew him. The same with many other historic characters. Such as robin hood and king arther. Interesting find danielost, hopefully I'll read it in full soon. This might be worth starting a topic about. If you feel it is go ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #313 Share Posted July 6, 2008 The same with many other historic characters. Such as robin hood and king arther. Robin hood and King Arthur are not figures on whom my salvation or damnation supposedly rests upon. If you feel it is go ahead. I will soon, as soon as I get around to articulating myself well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted July 6, 2008 #314 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Robin hood and King Arthur are not figures on whom my salvation or damnation supposedly rests upon. I will soon, as soon as I get around to articulating myself well. No but for a very long time they were both thought of as just stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #315 Share Posted July 6, 2008 No but for a very long time they were both thought of as just stories. Theres historical proof of King Arthur and Robin Hood? I didn't know either of them were real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted July 6, 2008 #316 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Theres historical proof of King Arthur and Robin Hood? I didn't know either of them were real. There is for king arther. But he was a local govener for the romans. They used to use a stone mold to make swords with. So when they said he took the sword from the stone he really did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #317 Share Posted July 6, 2008 There is for king arther. But he was a local govener for the romans. They used to use a stone mold to make swords with. So when they said he took the sword from the stone he really did. Huh, I did not know that. I always figured there was a wee grain of truth to the stories of King Arthur and his court. I think the story of Jesus is similar, as in there is a grain of truth to it, but perhaps for now it is lost to history. We have the myth, but we don't have the man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamsSon Posted July 6, 2008 #318 Share Posted July 6, 2008 (edited) son perhaps if you were confident in your beleif's you would encourage this for others......you can't know what is best for another ...how arrogant of me to say to you should be a nb because I think you should be correct?? welll i wouldn't because i resepct your choices, i think they work for you in a way you can relate and connect the best..... unless you are seeking to be validated by getting another to agree or convert then perhaps this is an opp for you to strengthen your faith correct???? I understand being excited about finding a path that brings out your best or what ever you are using it for..., oh ye of little faith trust that others will find their way also ..... perhaps thats what faith is for to use it focus on your own journey that is where you will do the most benefit and your example will show what you know and perhaps it will touch others, perhaps it won't in a way that works for them or dosent both ways are valuable you know...., you dont get to decide how though son........ you can miss too much when you are only open to seeing others in a way that you agree with... Sheri, I am not seeking to convert anyone. I am doing the same thing everyone else is doing here, sharing what I know and what I think. If in sharing my knowledge, God uses that to reach someone, well that's just great, but it will be God doing it, not me. But like I have said, if I know 2+2=4, I am not going to spend my time considering the possibility that 2+2=3. Edited July 6, 2008 by IamsSon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #319 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Sheri, I am not seeking to convert anyone. I am doing the same thing everyone else is doing here, sharing what I know and what I think. If in sharing my knowledge, Go uses that to reach someone, well that's just great, but it will be god doing it, not me. But like I have said, if I know 2+2=4, I am not going to spend my time considering the possibility that 2+2=3. Until the day comes where you add two apples to two more and you find yourself with five. And then you will know that Big Brother is watching you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted July 6, 2008 #320 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Until the day comes where you add two apples to two more and you find yourself with five. And then you will know that Big Brother is watching you hopefully that happens after I plant that apple tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #321 Share Posted July 6, 2008 hopefully that happens after I plant that apple tree. Ha ha ha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamsSon Posted July 6, 2008 #322 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Until the day comes where you add two apples to two more and you find yourself with five. And then you will know that Big Brother is watching you If that happens, I hope I'm counting $1,000 packs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #323 Share Posted July 6, 2008 If that happens, I hope I'm counting $1,000 packs. But Big Brother elimenates the need for money in his totalitarian state! After all, in Oceania war is peace, freedom is slavery and 2+2=5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielost Posted July 6, 2008 #324 Share Posted July 6, 2008 But Big Brother elimenates the need for money in his totalitarian state! After all, in Oceania war is peace, freedom is slavery and 2+2=5. I don't live in Oceania. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
churchanddestroy Posted July 6, 2008 #325 Share Posted July 6, 2008 I don't live in Oceania. Perhaps someday soon you will Big Brother is watchin youuu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now