The bible.

riptorn311 wrote:

some one new wrote: “Clean” biblically speaking is a rather subjective term. David was seen as perfect in the sight of God despite what he did in the past because he truely repented of his sins. Job, on the other hand, did nothing wrong and was Also seen as being upright. You can be “clean” but not as spiritially strong in resisting evil (and thus can be influenced by the world) Jesus, being perfect, fellowshipped with sinners at a supper, Solomon was given wisdom from God yet he made the decision to worship the idols of his many wives (two clean people aren’t equal). The Bible is also a book that can cause conviction for believers. Although it’s not always specifically stated One verse may be meant for one person and another verse for another person.

Heres a more clear example if you couldn’t understand my jargon above. When a person gives their life to Christ the are saved (biblically speaking) and are therefore cleansed of their sins.
That person wouldn’t be as spiritially resistant to the lusts of the flesh as a experienced Christian would be. Hope that makes sense.

So...it’s o.k. for a spiritually strong person to be married to an unbelieving spouse...But, if the partner is not strong spirituality, then they should seperate? Thats kinda what I got from what you said.

Pretty much...

Well I wouldn’t say those who wrote it were primitive and ignorant. I mean it is a beautiful piece of work that is one for the records of great writing in literature. But that’s the thing. It’s a fictional piece of literature with good and bad intentions.

Those who claim that this was the message of god translated by humans into writing really need to think about what they are suggesting. They are trying to tell us some supernatural creature has spoken and translated to human beings his will of them, the world, and its beginnings. How is this more likely than a group of humans actually compiling and writing this. I mean if this is likely, then who’s to say the mythologies of the Greeks, Egyptians, etc aren’t as likely as well. They all have similar things of gods interacting with humans or even providing them with their will. Yet the majority of these that suggest this proclaim those to be silly and wild claims. So obviously it is seen as a wild claim.

I’m not here to suggest that it isn’t possible (I don’t know the secrets of this world), but I am trying to suggest that it does seem more outlandish than a group of humans deriving the book and ultimately the religion. Not to mention, like any other piece of literature, it is full of fallacies, false truths, and hypocrisies that wouldn’t seem plausible with the god the religions describes.

Even more so the book has many things “taken” from other works of the time which suggests that either it’s the same god translating all these other books or that all the humans of the time were seeing and translating similar ideas. Well if you go back and look at all the religions they were seeing similar things and coming up with similar ideas although still unique. Much of the Bible, though, can have traces to older works, such as many things described in Ancient Egyptian Mythology and Sumerian literature.

The point is, it’s a piece of literature that comes with some of the same baggage as everything else. I doubt something such as a god would translate something with such baggage. Thus it is more likely that this is a work of human beings. It served two purposes. The philosophical side on how to act and behave in a civilized world. Second, is the political side. People are less likely to revolt, complain, and ravage when they understand they have something to live and slave for. Manipulate them into thinking that there is something larger than themselves, and the rich, and they will see this world as something to work for the next.


Either way, I’m not proclaiming either to be right, but look throughout historical data and there is one choice that is not only more plausible but probable. While the other is something outlandish and completely derived. There is nothing in the world to suggest a god or anything like that. The idea of something like a god has to come from a human’s ignorance in not being to explain things that seem supernatural to him. Thus the idea of a superior creature could come about such as a god. But within nature and a pure view, none of that would come about. Thus the idea of a god alone, yet one translating this book, seems outlandish to begin with.

But I do not know the secrets of the world but I do like to break down false truths. I personally believe that the Bible is a beautiful piece of fictional literature but that’s it. All facts and historical data point to it being written and derived by man but I guess there’s a slightly more outlandish and fantastical view of it being god’s word. However, I think we should all start to move past these things accepting the more knowledge we have gained and see it as this piece of literature and not the word of god. But until then I guess we’ll be stuck in the past. Sure there is a chance of it being god’s word, but I think its time we start getting a little more real with these things.

Zucas wrote: Well I wouldn’t say those who wrote it were primitive and ignorant. I mean it is a beautiful piece of work that is one for the records of great writing in literature. But that’s the thing. It’s a fictional piece of literature with good and bad intentions.

Bad intentions? Explain the bad intentions of the bible.

Those who claim that this was the message of god translated by humans into writing really need to think about what they are suggesting. They are trying to tell us some supernatural creature has spoken and translated to human beings his will of them, the world, and its beginnings. How is this more likely than a group of humans actually compiling and writing this. I mean if this is likely, then who’s to say the mythologies of the Greeks, Egyptians, etc aren’t as likely as well. They all have similar things of gods interacting with humans or even providing them with their will. Yet the majority of these that suggest this proclaim those to be silly and wild claims. So obviously it is seen as a wild claim.

At this point its about faith, not much more I can say other than its about a personal relationship. If you don’t have that personal relationship than I suppose you can see all religions as being equal.

I’m not here to suggest that it isn’t possible (I don’t know the secrets of this world), but I am trying to suggest that it does seem more outlandish than a group of humans deriving the book and ultimately the religion. Not to mention, like any other piece of literature, it is full of fallacies, false truths, and hypocrisies that wouldn’t seem plausible with the god the religions describes

Explain.

Even more so the book has many things “taken” from other works of the time which suggests that either it’s the same god translating all these other books or that all the humans of the time were seeing and translating similar ideas. Well if you go back and look at all the religions they were seeing similar things and coming up with similar ideas although still unique. Much of the Bible, though, can have traces to older works, such as many things described in Ancient Egyptian Mythology and Sumerian literature.

An interesting look at the epic of Gilgamesh.
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/gilgamesh.html
Many of the added ideas in Christianity didn’t come from the Bible but from the Christianization of the surrounding cultures by the Romans. Like December 25 being Jesus' birthday etc.

The point is, it’s a piece of literature that comes with some of the same baggage as everything else. I doubt something such as a god would translate something with such baggage. Thus it is more likely that this is a work of human beings. It served two purposes. The philosophical side on how to act and behave in a civilized world. Second, is the political side. People are less likely to revolt, complain, and ravage when they understand they have something to live and slave for. Manipulate them into thinking that there is something larger than themselves, and the rich, and they will see this world as something to work for the next.

The message of Christianity isn’t that complex or confusing its really pretty straight foward. When it comes to the history of Christianity you have two major extremes when it comes to interpretation. One side uses the word of God to justify child abuse, spousal abuse, slavery, racism etc. The other side doesn’t want to be offensive so they believe all paths are equal (thus they take away from the bible). Christians essentially fall somewhere between these two extremes. People added the Baggage.

Either way, I’m not proclaiming either to be right, but look throughout historical data and there is one choice that is not only more plausible but probable. While the other is something outlandish and completely derived. There is nothing in the world to suggest a god or anything like that. The idea of something like a god has to come from a human’s ignorance in not being to explain things that seem supernatural to him. Thus the idea of a superior creature could come about such as a god. But within nature and a pure view, none of that would come about. Thus the idea of a god alone, yet one translating this book, seems outlandish to begin with.

Going back to what I said before, its about faith and faith is gathered from personal experiences. Not just an explaination of how it happened

But I do not know the secrets of the world but I do like to break down false truths. I personally believe that the Bible is a beautiful piece of fictional literature but that’s it. All facts and historical data point to it being written and derived by man but I guess there’s a slightly more outlandish and fantastical view of it being god’s word. However, I think we should all start to move past these things accepting the more knowledge we have gained and see it as this piece of literature and not the word of god. But until then I guess we’ll be stuck in the past. Sure there is a chance of it being god’s word, but I think its time we start getting a little more real with these things.

I don’t have all of the answers either I was just replying to your post from a Christian perspective. The Bible really loses its meaning if its just a work of fiction. There would be no significance of it message. If people truly did follow Jesus' example/teachings the world would be a better place.

Sound DBZ logic cannot be destroyed; the efforts of the so-called super elite will always be in vain. Have at thee Krom!

I think someone is confusing the teaching of Jesus and the teachings that are in the bible.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

A theist wrote: My first part got cut off, I said he also could have been talking to angels. Pain and Suffering came from God, death was the fault of Adam, he made himself mortal. Its also interesting that Adam received the blame (rather than Eve) he received the commandment directly from God to not eat it, disobeying him it wasn’t merely eating the fruit. Rageoverdose made a good point in an earlier thread when he stated that God isn’t Omnipotent, but not completely correct (I think he goes to far with that idea). God is Almighty and can do all things for those who call on him and try to follow his will (but thats just it), but he can’t work with those who don’t follow his will. Before they ate the fruit they were pure and without sin (although they had the capacity). Living in paradise with a certain pureness to them, after they ate the fruit like I said before, sin contaminated (as so to speak) mankind, thats why its said that after God destroys this world he will give us new perfect bodies because the ones we have are “damaged goods”. Now Adam and Eve were outside of God’s will (his hedge of protection if you will) which eventually led to their demise.

First historical evidence isn’t evidence for the supernatural.
All powerful god couldn’t make a human body that was immune to all forms of “sin”. Funny how the huge flaw in his supposed design is Adams fault.
How can something perfect, become imperfect?

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

God could have made a perfect adam immune to all sin but once again there would be no free will no choice to love god no real authentic relationship and things that are perfect can go unperfect because there not impeckable, which is beyond sin its not even in there system

A genius isnt someone with a massive amount of intellegence, a genius is someone who shoots at something no one else can see and hits it.

Astro wrote: God could have made a perfect adam immune to all sin but once again there would be no free will no choice to love god no real authentic relationship and things that are perfect can go unperfect because there not impeckable, which is beyond sin its not even in there system

But free will doesn’t really exist, every action we take is just what we think will give us the most pleasure or avoid the most pain. Give me one example of an action that is not an attempt at boosting one’s own wellbeing (directly or indirectly)

If everything is planned out in advance by god then there can be no free will...Agreed Shaun

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." Stephen F. Roberts

Shaun of the Living wrote:

Astro wrote: God could have made a perfect adam immune to all sin but once again there would be no free will no choice to love god no real authentic relationship and things that are perfect can go unperfect because there not impeckable, which is beyond sin its not even in there system

But free will doesn’t really exist, every action we take is just what we think will give us the most pleasure or avoid the most pain. Give me one example of an action that is not an attempt at boosting one’s own wellbeing (directly or indirectly)

Hunger strikes, for one.

Omni-Man wrote:

Shaun of the Living wrote:

Astro wrote: God could have made a perfect adam immune to all sin but once again there would be no free will no choice to love god no real authentic relationship and things that are perfect can go unperfect because there not impeckable, which is beyond sin its not even in there system

But free will doesn’t really exist, every action we take is just what we think will give us the most pleasure or avoid the most pain. Give me one example of an action that is not an attempt at boosting one’s own wellbeing (directly or indirectly)

Hunger strikes, for one.

You’re wrong because you’re not taking into consideration of how humans use cost-benefit analysis. A hunger strike gives one suffering by making them hungry, but the person who goes on a hunger strike does it because he feels it’s for an important reason. Doing something for what is considered an important reason makes the person going on a hunger strike feel like they’re doing something that matters. This good feeling is the reason they go on hunger strike in the first place, because they think the feeling they will get from doing something that makes a difference will be more pleasurable than the pain suffered from starving themselves. It’s the same with every deliberate action. Ever. The problem when arguing about things like this is that people forget that a good feeling or false expectation of good karma can be just as much of a reward psychological as more primal pleasures are physically; like food, sex, sleep, comfort etc. People get pleasure from helping others or they wouldn’t do it.

Astro wrote: God could have made a perfect adam immune to all sin but once again there would be no free will no choice to love god no real authentic relationship and things that are perfect can go unperfect because there not impeckable, which is beyond sin its not even in there system

Fail.

Cid wrote: You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews

Azrael angel of destruction wrote:

Haylias wrote:

crys14 wrote:

Haylias wrote: The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.

1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.

1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture

1. All 421 right here.

2. True, but the Bible says we were poofed into existence 6000 years ago.

3. There are more than just these

4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster

heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale

lol, sorry for bumping this but that made me laugh, no mythical creatures? There’s a fucking super hero in it.

Light pole barrel,chopper stupid long/
New Orleans nigga, I get super dome/ Lil Wayne - Wasted

KlNG JOHN wrote:

Azrael angel of destruction wrote:

Haylias wrote:

crys14 wrote:

Haylias wrote: The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.

1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.

1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture

1. All 421 right here.

2. True, but the Bible says we were poofed into existence 6000 years ago.

3. There are more than just these

4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster

heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale

lol, sorry for bumping this but that made me laugh, no mythical creatures? There’s a fucking super hero in it.

The bible does have a happy ending just like a fairy tale...and yes there are mythical creatures...unicorns anyone?

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." Stephen F. Roberts

KlNG JOHN wrote: lol, sorry for bumping this but that made me laugh, no mythical creatures? There’s a fucking super hero in it.

I find it hard to believe that there’s someone in real life who’s stronger than Superman.

Its probably just a story to teach people lessons about respect and life!!
You don’t have to believe anything it says just respect its wisdom! i mean it was written back on the.... yeah idk but barely anybody could write back then, so who ever wrote it had to be hella smart!!!

T.L.O.Z.R. wrote: Its probably just a story to teach people lessons about respect and life!!
You don’t have to believe anything it says just respect its wisdom! i mean it was written back on the.... yeah idk but barely anybody could write back then, so who ever wrote it had to be hella smart!!!

You might be surprised to find out that not many scribes could red back then...its not difficult to copy pen strokes...The originals(which re long gone) have ben transcribed countless times with so many variations you cant tell what is true and what is rubbish

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." Stephen F. Roberts

T.L.O.Z.R. wrote: Its probably just a story to teach people lessons about respect and life!!
You don’t have to believe anything it says just respect its wisdom!

The Bible is based around an ancient Middle Eastern death cult, I fail to see how it’s values have any place in modern society.

Stoning children to death is not wisdom. It’s insanity.

I find that book full of shit.

COLOR ME!