Thread: What is your opinion of the Bible, and of Jesus?
I just figured I would ask this question, because quite frankly I'm curious to know your opinion.
Being a Christian, I do believe that the Bible is the word of God, and that Jesus is God's son.
Here's why I believe this:
The Bible was written by 40 men over a period of 1,500 years. Does that make it the word of God? No. But there's never been another book like that, EVER.
Historians have used the both the old and new testament to find places and people that existed in the past.
Many said these people and places didn't exist, yet when they went into these areas and went digging, they found these people and places that the Bible mentioned.
Does that make it the word of God? No. But it means it is historically accurate. Real people wrote about what they saw!
The Bible contains over 300 prophecies regarding the Messiah. Jesus fulfilled every one of those prophecies. Now some will argue that those prophecies were written after Jesus death. However the first Greek translation of the old testament was done 250 years before Jesus was born.
So how did the Bible writers know that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem? How did they know that Jesus would perform all these healing works? How did they know that Jesus would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver, 250 yrs before Jesus was born?
Does that mean it's the word of God? No, but the evidence is worth considering.
And then Jesus, in his own words said: "I'm gonna die, but in 3 days I will be resurrected." Jesus was later arrested, and on the night he was, his disciples fled in fear, which anyone would do.
And Jesus was then executed, and his disciples essentially said: "Might as well go back to our old lives, I guess we were wrong!"
But then something happened that made all these men come back and be willing to die a martyr's death. All of them died a martyr's death, accept for John.
And what did they die for?
There was nothing to be gained, there were no riches. The Jews viewed these people as the heretics, and thus kicked them out of the Jewish culture, even though many of these men were members of their own race.
The Romans burned these people alive, as well as put them in the arena to be torn apart by wild animals.
So why were these men willing to die for this new belief system?
Because they said: "I saw him die, and I saw him come back." When questioned by the very same religious leaders who had Jesus killed, and ordered to stop speaking about him, Saint Peter, and John, replied: "We cannot stop speaking about the things we have seen and heard."
And here's something else, on the night of his arrest, when being questioned by the religious leaders, Jesus said to them: "From here on, you will see the Son Of Man sitting at the right hand of power." -Mark 14:62.
Within a year after Jesus' death, the disciple Stephen was arrested by the very same religious leaders that had Jesus killed, said in his testimony: "Look, I see the heavens opened up, and the Son Of Man sitting at the right hand of God." - Acts 7:57.
Does that make it the Bible the word of God?
After considering all the evidence presented, judge for yourself.
DISCLAIMER: I am just merely asking a question.
And am just sharing my viewpoints, and why I feel the way I do.
Now I am in no way disparaging other belief systems.
And when answering this, I ask that we all be professional and courteous.
I did NOT make this thread to give people an excuse to offend, or speak disrespectful of each other.
So let's please keep things civil, and have a conversation.
I'm atheist (exmormon) and don't believe it. I feel that if a deity does in fact exist, it certainly isn't the Abrahamic god. Also, Christianity was just a Jewish cult. Christianity is to Judaism what Mormonism is to Christianity.
That being said, I think the New Testament is okay (It's pro-slavery) in terms of morality (there are plenty of better moral codes though). There's no proof of it and the bible has been altered so horrifically (for both translational and political reasons) that it's nothing like whatever it used to be. They provide inaccurate and unprovable information (we don't know where Jesus was born, or even if he was.) The Gospels were all written long after Jesus' death and the deaths of his disciples.... that's if they even existed, there's no proof of that (the bible is about as much proof of Jesus and Co. as Rome's foundation story is of Remus and Romulus.) Also, coming back to Rome, martyring in the coloseum didn't happen, there's literally nothing suggesting that other than the word of the early Catholic Church, which came about long after they allegedly happened. (Nero did burn them however, and others). The Old Testament on the other hand is awful. It's just a collection of random texts with no verifiable authors and vague references to historical events that occured befor it was written. It is absurdly pro-murder, pro-slavery, pro-sexism, pro-rape, and filled with ridiculous and baseless rules that wouldn't be out of place in Saudi Arabia. ISIS is better at following the Old Testament than most Christians are. The Messiah described in the Old Testament doesn't describe Jesus at all. In any way. He's hyped up as more of a military leader and no specific details are given. The only source for Jesus and Co. are the religious texts based around him. I don't count Norse sagas as proof of Odin and Thor, Egyptian ruins aren't proof for Anubis and Osiris, the Old Testament doesn't prove Adam and Eve, etc. Judaism is a branch off of Caananite polytheism. Using your religon to defend your religion is a logical fallacy.
Tl;dr the New Testament isn't terrible. Although none of the Gospels were written by whom they claim to be (Mathew didn't write Mathew), the Old Testament is terrible in both reliability and morality and wouldn't be out of place in ISIS occupied Iraq and Syria. Christianity is a break off of Judaism, which is in turn a break off of Caananite Polytheism. There is nothing better at creating atheists than the bible.
Nothing in the bible is verifiable and the few things that are have many sources and were known before the gospels (or any of the books, really) came about. It doesn't take a genius to say "huh, a city was destroyed some years ago, I guess I'll include that in here!" Or "huh, the Roman governor was Pontius Pilate, guess I'll include him!" the mistranslations and political changes are so rampant that the bible that first existed and the one we have now shouldn't even be viewed as the same. Also, as LordGoss said using your religion to argue your religion simply doesn't work. The Old Testament is very blatantly false and the New Testament relies on the old one. They have a name for people who have read and studied the bible in its entirety, they're called "atheists." It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. People who defend it have to rely on false information, apologetics, and "faith."
using your religion to defend your religion is a logical fallacy
I wish more people got this. It's hard to watch people defend the bible with the bible and vague historical events/locations. "Hey! The bible mentions a location that exists! It must be true!" I also wish more people educated themselves on the politics behind the bible.
I'm atheist (exmormon) and don't believe it. I feel that if a deity does in fact exist, it certainly isn't the Abrahamic god. Also, Christia… morenity was just a Jewish cult. Christianity is to Judaism what Mormonism is to Christianity.
That being said, I think the New Testament is okay (It's pro-slavery) in terms of morality (there are plenty of better moral codes though). There's no proof of it and the bible has been altered so horrifically (for both translational and political reasons) that it's nothing like whatever it used to be. They provide inaccurate and unprovable information (we don't know where Jesus was born, or even if he was.) The Gospels were all written long after Jesus' death and the deaths of his disciples.... that's if they even existed, there's no proof of that (the bible is about as much proof of Jesus and Co. as Rome's foundation story is of Remus and Romulus.) Also, coming back to Rome, martyring in the coloseum didn't ha… [view original content]
Honestly, the mental gymnastics people will do to justify it. I'm legitimately ashamed that I believed any of it. It makes it difficult seeing others believe what I now know is blatantly false. I never blame them though, I know what they're going through. It's tough to get out of you know? You spend so much time defending it with absurdly long and complicated apologetic arguments until you stop and think "wat." Once you take Occam's Razor to it you find that it simply doesn't work. If everyone took the time to question and think about it there probably wouldn't be religion any more, or at least not theistic ones.
Ditto ^ @LordGoss1138
Nothing in the bible is verifiable and the few things that are have many sources and were known before the gospels … more(or any of the books, really) came about. It doesn't take a genius to say "huh, a city was destroyed some years ago, I guess I'll include that in here!" Or "huh, the Roman governor was Pontius Pilate, guess I'll include him!" the mistranslations and political changes are so rampant that the bible that first existed and the one we have now shouldn't even be viewed as the same. Also, as LordGoss said using your religion to argue your religion simply doesn't work. The Old Testament is very blatantly false and the New Testament relies on the old one. They have a name for people who have read and studied the bible in its entirety, they're called "atheists." It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. People who defend it have to rely on false information, apologetics, and "faith."
Right? I know what you mean. I'm also an ExMo. When I left Mormonism after realizing how blatantly false it was I still considered myself Christian until I realized it was just as false, only unlike Mormonism it has time protecting it. I heard a pretty good quote that I think about a lot : "In a cult, there is a guy at the top who knows it is all a sham, in a religion that guy is dead." I view myself as atheist now, but sometimes I wonder if there is some higher power. I hope it isn't the Abrahamic God, he's legitimately terrible. I liked how you mentioned ISIS in your earlier post though. People will denounce their beliefs but still hold to the Old Testament, which defends them (ISIS). It's unfortunate. I do know what you mean about feeling shame though. I normally view myself as intelligent but when I dwell on my past belief I just cringe.
Honestly, the mental gymnastics people will do to justify it. I'm legitimately ashamed that I believed any of it. It makes it difficult seei… moreng others believe what I now know is blatantly false. I never blame them though, I know what they're going through. It's tough to get out of you know? You spend so much time defending it with absurdly long and complicated apologetic arguments until you stop and think "wat." Once you take Occam's Razor to it you find that it simply doesn't work. If everyone took the time to question and think about it there probably wouldn't be religion any more, or at least not theistic ones.
Ezekiel 23:20 “There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.”
I don't really mind religion and Jesus at all, but what triggers me is the fact that people would go as far as ignoring medical help for their sick children and go do faith healing which fails most of the time.
I am sorry that's what I believe and you can't disprove it but 1 omnipotent heavenly lightning bolt from Zeus brings the Abrahamic god to his knees including satan and all messangers/prophets simultaneously in no time.
I am sorry that's what I believe and you can't disprove it but 1 omnipotent heavenly lightning bolt from Zeus brings the Abrahamic god to his knees including satan and all messangers/prophets simultaneously in no time.
Yeah, I like the part where Peter is just kind of hanging out and gets hungry, so he sees a giant blanket come out of they filled with animals, and God tell him to eat them, and Peter's like 'no, there's pork and shellfish in there,' and God's like 'Hey, you guys aren't Jews anymore, so cut it out with the Kosher crap.'
That's actually in the Bible. Acts 10:9-16. I might be paraphrasing a little.
But, in all fairness, it does say "he fell into a trance," so at least the Bible is self-aware about being delusional.
Of course, anybody who has seen "Life of Brian" knows about number four, showing that Monty Python's rendition can be just as ridiculous as the original.
Though to be a bit more serious, your "The Bible was written by 40 men over a period of 1,500 years" is one of the main reasons why the Bible can be said to be nonsense (first of all, Judiasm is over 1000 years old and the Bible as we know it was canonized in around 400 AD, we're talking way more than 1,500 years and way more than 40 people) - especially when dealing with the old testiment, the Bible is the product of historical evolution while simuntaneously claiming to be divine revelation. It's a collection of beliefs which changed over time, and oftentimes was simply utilitarian advice (for instance the story about keeping a spade in the video above - contamination during military compaigns was a major problem even into the modern era). That's also why the Bible is so internally contradictory, and why it needs to be expanded upon. Watch Empires: The Kingdom of David, and it gives you a very good outline of the development of Judiasm from a polytheistic religion to what it was until Roman times. It's historical, not in the sense of being a historical record, but in the sense of being the amalgamation of a series of separate myths over history.
I am sorry that's what I believe and you can't disprove it but 1 omnipotent heavenly lightning bolt from Zeus brings the Abrahamic god to his knees including satan and all messangers/prophets simultaneously in no time.
What's with all your threads on religion? I'm pretty sure the religion thread was created for the purpose to not have so many subtopics of one topic made into multiple threads.
I merged the Christian Bible thread with the religion thread, as the religion thread is for discussion of all religions, Christianity included. I'll leave the prayer thread separate though, as it's still discussing prayer as related to religion rather than just religion itself.
I also flagged insults against religion again. Please don't make comments about people's belief system being stupid or idiotic. Be respectful. This is the second warning I've given on the subject. Please don't do it again, from here on out, or I'll have to start giving out temporary bans. Thanks.
Ok, maybe mentioning that book was too strong for some people.
But, I think the point is still there. Killing someone based on their sexuality, beliefs or ethnics is not moral.
According to the Bible, being homsexual is a sin, and if someone is found guilty of being one, then that person will be killed. (Leviticus 20:13)
And I won't even continue, becuse I do think that is no more support is needed for my argument.
Without being offensive, can any one answer why would they revere a book, which among other things teaches this.
I don't understand why mentioning one book as a degree of how imoral I find something is offensive, but I hope this time I managed no to cross the line.
Comments
Thread: What is your opinion of the Bible, and of Jesus?
I just figured I would ask this question, because quite frankly I'm curious to know your opinion.
Being a Christian, I do believe that the Bible is the word of God, and that Jesus is God's son.
Here's why I believe this:
The Bible was written by 40 men over a period of 1,500 years. Does that make it the word of God? No. But there's never been another book like that, EVER.
Historians have used the both the old and new testament to find places and people that existed in the past.
Many said these people and places didn't exist, yet when they went into these areas and went digging, they found these people and places that the Bible mentioned.
Does that make it the word of God? No. But it means it is historically accurate. Real people wrote about what they saw!
The Bible contains over 300 prophecies regarding the Messiah. Jesus fulfilled every one of those prophecies. Now some will argue that those prophecies were written after Jesus death. However the first Greek translation of the old testament was done 250 years before Jesus was born.
So how did the Bible writers know that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem? How did they know that Jesus would perform all these healing works? How did they know that Jesus would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver, 250 yrs before Jesus was born?
Does that mean it's the word of God? No, but the evidence is worth considering.
And then Jesus, in his own words said: "I'm gonna die, but in 3 days I will be resurrected." Jesus was later arrested, and on the night he was, his disciples fled in fear, which anyone would do.
And Jesus was then executed, and his disciples essentially said: "Might as well go back to our old lives, I guess we were wrong!"
But then something happened that made all these men come back and be willing to die a martyr's death. All of them died a martyr's death, accept for John.
And what did they die for?
There was nothing to be gained, there were no riches. The Jews viewed these people as the heretics, and thus kicked them out of the Jewish culture, even though many of these men were members of their own race.
The Romans burned these people alive, as well as put them in the arena to be torn apart by wild animals.
So why were these men willing to die for this new belief system?
Because they said: "I saw him die, and I saw him come back." When questioned by the very same religious leaders who had Jesus killed, and ordered to stop speaking about him, Saint Peter, and John, replied: "We cannot stop speaking about the things we have seen and heard."
And here's something else, on the night of his arrest, when being questioned by the religious leaders, Jesus said to them: "From here on, you will see the Son Of Man sitting at the right hand of power." -Mark 14:62.
Within a year after Jesus' death, the disciple Stephen was arrested by the very same religious leaders that had Jesus killed, said in his testimony: "Look, I see the heavens opened up, and the Son Of Man sitting at the right hand of God." - Acts 7:57.
Does that make it the Bible the word of God?
After considering all the evidence presented, judge for yourself.
DISCLAIMER: I am just merely asking a question.
And am just sharing my viewpoints, and why I feel the way I do.
Now I am in no way disparaging other belief systems.
And when answering this, I ask that we all be professional and courteous.
I did NOT make this thread to give people an excuse to offend, or speak disrespectful of each other.
So let's please keep things civil, and have a conversation.
I'm atheist (exmormon) and don't believe it. I feel that if a deity does in fact exist, it certainly isn't the Abrahamic god. Also, Christianity was just a Jewish cult. Christianity is to Judaism what Mormonism is to Christianity.
That being said, I think the New Testament is okay (It's pro-slavery) in terms of morality (there are plenty of better moral codes though). There's no proof of it and the bible has been altered so horrifically (for both translational and political reasons) that it's nothing like whatever it used to be. They provide inaccurate and unprovable information (we don't know where Jesus was born, or even if he was.) The Gospels were all written long after Jesus' death and the deaths of his disciples.... that's if they even existed, there's no proof of that (the bible is about as much proof of Jesus and Co. as Rome's foundation story is of Remus and Romulus.) Also, coming back to Rome, martyring in the coloseum didn't happen, there's literally nothing suggesting that other than the word of the early Catholic Church, which came about long after they allegedly happened. (Nero did burn them however, and others). The Old Testament on the other hand is awful. It's just a collection of random texts with no verifiable authors and vague references to historical events that occured befor it was written. It is absurdly pro-murder, pro-slavery, pro-sexism, pro-rape, and filled with ridiculous and baseless rules that wouldn't be out of place in Saudi Arabia. ISIS is better at following the Old Testament than most Christians are. The Messiah described in the Old Testament doesn't describe Jesus at all. In any way. He's hyped up as more of a military leader and no specific details are given. The only source for Jesus and Co. are the religious texts based around him. I don't count Norse sagas as proof of Odin and Thor, Egyptian ruins aren't proof for Anubis and Osiris, the Old Testament doesn't prove Adam and Eve, etc. Judaism is a branch off of Caananite polytheism. Using your religon to defend your religion is a logical fallacy.
Tl;dr the New Testament isn't terrible. Although none of the Gospels were written by whom they claim to be (Mathew didn't write Mathew), the Old Testament is terrible in both reliability and morality and wouldn't be out of place in ISIS occupied Iraq and Syria. Christianity is a break off of Judaism, which is in turn a break off of Caananite Polytheism. There is nothing better at creating atheists than the bible.
Ditto ^ @LordGoss1138
Nothing in the bible is verifiable and the few things that are have many sources and were known before the gospels (or any of the books, really) came about. It doesn't take a genius to say "huh, a city was destroyed some years ago, I guess I'll include that in here!" Or "huh, the Roman governor was Pontius Pilate, guess I'll include him!" the mistranslations and political changes are so rampant that the bible that first existed and the one we have now shouldn't even be viewed as the same. Also, as LordGoss said using your religion to argue your religion simply doesn't work. The Old Testament is very blatantly false and the New Testament relies on the old one. They have a name for people who have read and studied the bible in its entirety, they're called "atheists." It simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny. People who defend it have to rely on false information, apologetics, and "faith."
I wish more people got this. It's hard to watch people defend the bible with the bible and vague historical events/locations. "Hey! The bible mentions a location that exists! It must be true!" I also wish more people educated themselves on the politics behind the bible.
Honestly, the mental gymnastics people will do to justify it. I'm legitimately ashamed that I believed any of it. It makes it difficult seeing others believe what I now know is blatantly false. I never blame them though, I know what they're going through. It's tough to get out of you know? You spend so much time defending it with absurdly long and complicated apologetic arguments until you stop and think "wat." Once you take Occam's Razor to it you find that it simply doesn't work. If everyone took the time to question and think about it there probably wouldn't be religion any more, or at least not theistic ones.
Right? I know what you mean. I'm also an ExMo. When I left Mormonism after realizing how blatantly false it was I still considered myself Christian until I realized it was just as false, only unlike Mormonism it has time protecting it. I heard a pretty good quote that I think about a lot : "In a cult, there is a guy at the top who knows it is all a sham, in a religion that guy is dead." I view myself as atheist now, but sometimes I wonder if there is some higher power. I hope it isn't the Abrahamic God, he's legitimately terrible. I liked how you mentioned ISIS in your earlier post though. People will denounce their beliefs but still hold to the Old Testament, which defends them (ISIS). It's unfortunate. I do know what you mean about feeling shame though. I normally view myself as intelligent but when I dwell on my past belief I just cringe.
“There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.”
I don't really mind religion and Jesus at all, but what triggers me is the fact that people would go as far as ignoring medical help for their sick children and go do faith healing which fails most of the time.
Extremely dry reading. Don't bother
I am sorry that's what I believe and you can't disprove it but 1 omnipotent heavenly lightning bolt from Zeus brings the Abrahamic god to his knees including satan and all messangers/prophets simultaneously in no time.
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
Yeah, I like the part where Peter is just kind of hanging out and gets hungry, so he sees a giant blanket come out of they filled with animals, and God tell him to eat them, and Peter's like 'no, there's pork and shellfish in there,' and God's like 'Hey, you guys aren't Jews anymore, so cut it out with the Kosher crap.'
That's actually in the Bible. Acts 10:9-16. I might be paraphrasing a little.
But, in all fairness, it does say "he fell into a trance," so at least the Bible is self-aware about being delusional.
Among some other doozies:
enter link description here
Of course, anybody who has seen "Life of Brian" knows about number four, showing that Monty Python's rendition can be just as ridiculous as the original.
Though to be a bit more serious, your "The Bible was written by 40 men over a period of 1,500 years" is one of the main reasons why the Bible can be said to be nonsense (first of all, Judiasm is over 1000 years old and the Bible as we know it was canonized in around 400 AD, we're talking way more than 1,500 years and way more than 40 people) - especially when dealing with the old testiment, the Bible is the product of historical evolution while simuntaneously claiming to be divine revelation. It's a collection of beliefs which changed over time, and oftentimes was simply utilitarian advice (for instance the story about keeping a spade in the video above - contamination during military compaigns was a major problem even into the modern era). That's also why the Bible is so internally contradictory, and why it needs to be expanded upon. Watch Empires: The Kingdom of David, and it gives you a very good outline of the development of Judiasm from a polytheistic religion to what it was until Roman times. It's historical, not in the sense of being a historical record, but in the sense of being the amalgamation of a series of separate myths over history.
[removed]
What's with all your threads on religion? I'm pretty sure the religion thread was created for the purpose to not have so many subtopics of one topic made into multiple threads.
I merged the Christian Bible thread with the religion thread, as the religion thread is for discussion of all religions, Christianity included. I'll leave the prayer thread separate though, as it's still discussing prayer as related to religion rather than just religion itself.
I also flagged insults against religion again. Please don't make comments about people's belief system being stupid or idiotic. Be respectful. This is the second warning I've given on the subject. Please don't do it again, from here on out, or I'll have to start giving out temporary bans. Thanks.
Ok, maybe mentioning that book was too strong for some people.
But, I think the point is still there. Killing someone based on their sexuality, beliefs or ethnics is not moral.
According to the Bible, being homsexual is a sin, and if someone is found guilty of being one, then that person will be killed. (Leviticus 20:13)
And I won't even continue, becuse I do think that is no more support is needed for my argument.
Without being offensive, can any one answer why would they revere a book, which among other things teaches this.
I don't understand why mentioning one book as a degree of how imoral I find something is offensive, but I hope this time I managed no to cross the line.