A little history on the Bible (page 2)

Dansk

Hi Hamas,

You can't believe what these people say just as you cannot believe what the Bible says.
How does anybody know these things

Don't let your previous brain-washing by Watchtower have an effect on you. They were always telling us not to read the works of higher critics because they are dangerous. You know, that's one of the truest things they ever DID say! You know why? Because these higher critics ARE dangerous to Watchtower dogma, wherein they can PROVE it's a load of ......brown stuff!

Hamas, I don't take anything on face value anymore. I research every day and I can tell you there are archaeological and historical discoveries out there that can genuinely disprove the Bible as being inspired of God. That's not the same as saying the existence or nonexistence of God can be proven, because it can't! For example, go to http://www.askwhy.co.uk/judaism/index.html#top

I sincerely respect your belief in God, but if that belief is completely enmeshed in the teachings of the Bible it is sorely misplaced my friend.

Dansk

peacefulpete

The best book I have yet seen on the overview of archeaololgy and the Bible is called ," The Bible Unearthed". Fantastic objective review of recent findings and how they have forced an extensive revision of 19th and early 20th century opinion. Written by two eminent scholars, it has cautiously avoided wild speculation and anti-bible diatribe.

Dansk

Hi Peacefulpete,

That particular book has been on my purchase list for some time (haven't finished my other books yet!).

Here's a synopsis as found on Amazon's website:

For the first time, the true history of ancient Israel as revealed through recent archaeological discoveries-and a controversial new take on when, why and how the Bible was written. In the past three decades, archaeologists have made great strides in recovering the lost world of the Old Testament. Dozens of digs in Egypt, Israel, Jordan and Lebanon have changed experts' understanding of ancient Israel and its neighbours- as well as their vision of the Bible's greatest tales. Yet until now, the public has remained almost entirely unaware of these discoveries which help separate legend from historical truth. Here, at last, two of archaeology's leading scholars shed new light on how the Bible came into existence. They assert, for example, that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob never existed, that David and Solomon were not great kings but obscure chieftains and that the Exodus never happened. They offer instead a new historical truth: the Bible was created by the people of the small, southern nation of Judah in a heroic last-ditch attempt to keep their faith alive after the demise of the larger, wealthier nation of Israel to the north. It is in this truth, not in the myths of the past, that the real value of the Bible is evident.

Dansk

link

Hamas,

I have to agree with you. I was talking to some history professors from our local university and their opinion is that much of ancient history cannot be proven because of the lack of verifiable contemporary evidence. They look at all of the best evidence that is available and come to an opinion based on that. Because it is based on lots of different interpretations of lots of different evidence there could be hundreds of possibilities. What you believe is based completely on your own personal interpretation of that evidence that you have been able to find or has been selectively put in front of you.

The point is that it will never be conclusive and so you cannot ever be dogmatic about your opinions.

Just my thoughts.

link

Dansk

Link

I was talking to some history professors from our local university and their opinion is that much of ancient history cannot be proven because of the lack of verifiable contemporary evidence.

Yes, and this can be applied to the Bible, also!

They look at all of the best evidence that is available and come to an opinion based on that.

In the case of the Bible, they'll have to take a LOOOOOOOOOONG look! Try Persian history!

Because it is based on lots of different interpretations of lots of different evidence there could be hundreds of possibilities.

Yes, which is why so many people are screwed up because their church claims to have the truth.

What you believe is based completely on your own personal interpretation of that evidence that you have been able to find or has been selectively put in front of you.

Like I said, when it comes to the Bible there aint no evidence! Faith is the result of what one wants to believe.

Dansk

Jessica Rabbit

Gumby,

Thanks for posting this information. Have you ever read the book "The Signature of God" by Grant Jeffrey? He talks about a mathematical code that is hidden all throughout the bible fortelling future events such as the holocaust. Do you have any knowlege of this stuff? I am interested in learning more about it.

JR

link

Dansk,

I am not disagreeing with you. These history professors were responding to my questions about Biblical history in the ancient near east so what they said applied to all such history, wherever it was recorded, in history books or in the Bible.

link

gumby

He talks about a mathematical code that is hidden all throughout the bible fortelling future events such as the holocaust.

There is no magical mathmaticle code in the bible for that would mean there is true prophecy and there is not. Codes can be pulled out of any group of numbers. Look up "bible code" on your search bar and see what you get. There are sites that disprove biblical mathmatical codes.

Gumby

Dansk

Jessica,

Grant Jeffrey? He talks about a mathematical code that is hidden all throughout the bible fortelling future events such as the holocaust.

I bet he sells a lot of books with that (old) idea! Go figure!

Link

Dansk,
I am not disagreeing with you.

I wasn't saying you were. Your points were good to disect because they're the type of points others might bring up.

Dansk

gumby

Hamas,

Here is an example of a religious apologist trying to prove gods word and Jesus being for real,

"Many critics of the Gospel accounts of the resurrection claim that Christ did not truly rise, that his followers took his body from the tomb and then proclaimed him risen from the dead. According to these critics, the resurrection was nothing more than a hoax." (Catholic Answers)

Now why must this be false? We know it is false because of what Jesus' friends did after he died. They died for him as martyrs. It is understanable to do this out of respect, but when your life is on the line, if you knew Jesus did not rise, you wouldn't die for him. Right before being beheaded you would say, "It's all a joke!" And surely you wouldn't say, "I am not worthy to die the way my Lord and God did."

So it is safe to conclude Jesus is God. Furthermore, if Jesus is God, his other claims will be true too. One such claim is that he would found a Church. This Church must date back to Jesus, so it is surely not a Protestant Church. Jesus established "what we see in the Catholic Church today—papacy, hierarchy, priesthood, sacraments, teaching authority, and, as a consequence of the last, infallibility. Christ’s Church, to do what he said it would do, had to have the character of doctrinal infallibility."

So there you have it! Since people "died' for Jesus........then he must have been real.

If that were true then all who have died for following witness doctrine were also correct.

Gumby

A little history on the Bible

Share this