I hate the bible. its ****E it has all the legitimacy of an WB comedy show. too many writers, and not enough worth if you need a group writen biography to tell you how to lead your life as a good person, than your family already dropped the ball, and we are ****ed as a species ok so im no bible beater. PEACE
The bible shouldn't be an instruction manual. It's more like a poke in the ribs to remind you of what you already know. I think it's written the way it is to prevent it from being a technical manual. Blind adherence to rules is essentially the opposite of the core message of the New Testament. It's written the way it is, I think, so the individual has to read it to interpret it, again, like music. Someone can tell you what a song means, but when you hear it you get a very different sense of it, and it may be somewhat different, or significantly different, than the first person's interpretation. Keep in mind also that the bible has been grossly misinterpreted and misused throughout history and even today, so you really need to read it and judge for yourself.
you guys know how i feel about this... so i'll just say, "yeah...what mr. gootan said!" (that's the very classic C.S. Lewis argument of "liar, lunatic of Lord) i believe Jesus Christ was the Son of God...I believe he died for as the sacrifice for my own sins...I believe that He seeks a personal relationship with everyone...I know He has enriched my life...and I know I'll spend eternity with Him. label me ignorant...say "some people will believe anything" and roll your eyes if you wish...but all your sarcasm will not eliminate what Christ has meant to me and to my family. stick to the wisdom of the world, if you wish..but I opt for sticking with the eternal God.
Am I late to this discussion? Ha ha, of course. Anyway...I just wanted to add that if the Bible was divinely inspired, then the epic of Gilgamesh (old babylonian version) would have to be as well. It was here that the Great Flood, Noah and his ark, and other stories first appear. Some of the text is near identical to the later Biblical version as well.
i've read that the story of the Great Flood is told even in Asian cultures...is that right?? it's not told the same way...but there's still the concept of a great flood that was a means of judgment from some deity. at least that's the way I understand it...anyone else ever heard that?
There are quite a number of stories told in other cultures about a variety of things from the Great Flood to the parables of Christ. I don't know the exact story of the flood but I do know that The Prodigal Son and Parable of the Talents were stories told by Buddha 500 years before Jesus was born.
i don't doubt that Jesus taught through parables that people would recognize in order to hammer home a point...
They weren't really recognizable parables. Only those who were educated or had studied east of Judea and Jerusalem would have known them. There are a large number of scholars who believe that during the "missing years" Jesus may have actually travelled into parts of what we now know as Asia. It was not uncommon for young men to go on a spiritual quest, particularly Jews. I would not be surprised if he brought those stories back with him and used them to, as you put it, hammer home a point. They were very effective stories.
No offense there but that's pretty bad logic. It's akin to saying "Man, I got this crazy friend Bill who's a real nutball. He also says 2+2 = 4. But since he's a nutball, 2+2 can't equal 4." Now I ain't haven so I don't know what fallacy that is but I know it is one. For the record, I imagine that very few non-Christians claim that all of his teaching are bad or wrong. I know that I, as a non-Christian, certainly believe that his views on tolerance and peace are spot on. Just because I think that Jesus was not the messiah and had no super natural powers doesn't mean I want to kill indescriminately.
I disagree rimbaud. The bible version is not the same as The Epic of Gilgamesh. It does, however, reinforce the validity of the flood itself. See, what you seem to assume is since the epic was written before Genesis that the bible incorporated the flood from the epic. However, since both different in important ways, one or the other has to be divine inspiration, not both, in the areas where they differ. Here is a helpful link to the sort the differences: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-285.htm
As a follow up to the link, read this part: The differences, including religious, ethical, and sheer quantity of details, make it unlikely that the Biblical account was dependent on any extant source from the Sumerian traditions. This still does not stop these liberal and secular scholars from advocating such a theory. The most accepted theory among evangelicals is that both have one common source, predating all the Sumerian forms -- from the conclusion of the same link above
I have a question for all the Christians here, and it stems from the fact that I think trying to argue that the bible is divinely inspired is the wrong approach with a non-Christians. My question is, when did you first come to believe that the bible was the inspired word of God? Would you have believed this before you became a Christian? I wouldn't have. I think the relationship with God comes first and from that one can see the truth in the bible. Do you agree?
I think the reason I started this thread is I wanted to gain knowledge. Often times, the point made about the bible ends up in: "Well, the bible is a translation." "Or the bible is just one of many religions, why should this one be special" A strong point for this view is that these other religions are often dated before the bible. However, there is at least some doubt as to when the parts of the bible were written, as per the article above. Another more difficult claim is the ancient relics that seem to be throw around like a darth vader glow sword. Half the time I've never even heard of these stories. Like the epic. I had to do research just to find out what rimbaud was talking about. I like those kind because I get to learn something I hadn't know before. The only thing I don't like is how they are used with a sort of single-mindedness to prove points. You should present both sides at least. Instead, people state these claims like their written in granite stone. Now, I know people can same the same thing about bible thumpers, too, and it is true. I just wish we could have an honest discussion without trying to undercut anothers beliefs.
I agree. It is a hot topic though, with a lot of baggage associated with it for a lot of people. So it's easy for people to polarise quite quickly. Glad you raised it though.
"Most religious historians view Islam as having been founded in 622 CE by Muhammad the Prophet (peace be upon him).* He lived from about 570 to 632 CE). The religion started in Mecca, when the angel Jibreel (Gabriel) read the first revelation to Muhammad (pbuh). (Mohammed and Muhammed (pbuh) are alternate spellings for his name.) Islam is seen as the youngest of the world's great religions." Feel free to correct me if this in wrong, but as the above quote points out, Islam does not predate Christianity. One other point I was interested in. We have had several of these discussions about the 'Bible' and its translations accuracies, its relevancy/irrelevancy, and its impact on us (whether we're born again, a member of another religion, or a non-believer). I was wondering why there is no similar dissection of the Koran or The Vedas? Is it a lack of knowledge about those articles specifically or is it that its ok to tear down Christianity but not Hinduism or Islam?
Utnoapishtim = Noah. Enki = God Enki told Utnoapishtim to build a boat for a coming flood. Utnoapishtim was told to take the "seed" of every living animal with him (presumably genetic material), in order to repopulate the destroyed world. Enki supplied him with a navigator who guided the boat to Mt. Ararat... Coincidence? Methinks not. The Biblical tale is taken from Babylonian myth/legend, which was passed down from ancient Sumerian flood myths (and the Epic of Gilgamesh). Did I mention that Noah was a Sumerian? Every ancient culture has a flood myth (duh, it actually happened) - on every continent. I tend to believe that elements of truth lie in each of those "myths"... And the connectivity of those myths is apparent if one wants to actually look for them.
Originally from Dylan Hi Dylan, The point I was trying to make is: If He is crazy, which of His teachings would you know is true and which are false? What are you basing your judgement of true or false against? And if you are using the 'relative' moral scale in your determination, who says you're right? Let's say in your example I didn't know 2+2=4. How would anyone prove it to me? Hopefully they wouldn't resort to chastising my attention span during the first grade, but instead pull out the 70+ page mathematical proof that 1+1=2 and then correlate from there. I guess the point of this is: you need absolutes to define absolutes. Jesus Christ's proof of the truth of His teachings was revealed in His resurrection.
Originally from Grizzled I first believed that when I saw His truth manifested in a real Christian. (Of course this is after I knew what some of the Bible said) To see things like His promises fulfilled and peace in the midst of trials in a person I respected really opened my eyes.
The meanings of the names of the heroes have absolutely no common root or connection. Noah means "rest," while Utnapishtim means "finder of life." Once again, I have to say treeman where's your proof. You seem to think it a foregone conclusion that the Epic of Gilgamesh was written before the Genesis, but many feel that the oldest parts of the bible were handed down by either oral tradition or by noah himself through the patriarchs to Moses. It is a fact that the Hebrews were known for handing down their records and tradition, so the historical possiblity exists at least that the early parts of the bible were written before any other. And treeman, no one is disputing the fact that both accounts have similarities, but those similarities don't mean the bible version was copied from them. Only that a flood actually happened to which, I think, even your persistance at calling it a myth is weak. It makes it even more of a posibility.
kbm, I was not speaking of the flood story when I was talking about near-verbatum. There are other parts that are closer. The flood story, though, would still be considered very close, with Noah's early incarnate building a large boat and taking pairs of animals on board, releasing birds, etc. Gilgamesh was the first written story, really. Language was invented only just before its first version. If the OT stories had been around earlier, then they should have been written first (not to mention the whole concept of monotheism should have been broached, instead of all of those pesky Near Eastern gods). To suggest that there is no connection is just plain silly. This is the same region, the same peoples, the same traditions that spawned Judaism and Christianity. Eden itself existed here in real life (although I forget the real name of the region - it is close to "eden" though). Your "Institute for Creation Research" link does little to change these facts. Indeed, all it does is present the similarities and then dismiss them by suggesting internal familial oral tradition (by Noah, of course) and lament over the bad ways of "secular" scholars. Sorry if I am not convinced. I, unfortunately, learned nothing from your link. Parrallels have been shown to exist with the books of Eccles, Gen, Deut, Psalms, Ezek, Jer, & Sam... This is not meant to diminish the Bible, by the way, merely show that it is part of a long tradition. It is only natural that there will be similarities.
