The Bible - The Outdated Scientific Paper

I am not meaning to hurt anyone, nor am I saying that your personal beleifs are a falacy, I am just saying what makes most sense to me. But if you put your religious side...outside, and actually think about it, this will make sense.

The bible is no more then an outdated scientific paper. It is a theory. Mankind had no good theory or reason for why the universe is the universe, why it is here, why we are here. So what did someone do? He created a story, Man has to have a reason for everything. So he created God, he must be the reason why everything is everything.

The bible is nothing more then a theory, just like evolution is a theory, no one knew how we got here, so Darwin thought about it and came up with evolution just as people came up with God.

The reason why religion is still around is because man still hasn't found a solid enough reason for why the universe is the universe. Once that happens religion itself will become obsolet.

Religion will probably be with us to the end of time, just because in order to know how the universe was created, you would have to know what was before the universe. Maybe the universe is alot older then everyone thinks. Maybe 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years is just a blink to the universe. Maybe the universe is in someone's eye?

I couldn't agree with you more, although like I keep saying, I am not anti-religion, nor am I anti-Bible.

But I was thinking that actually the Bible itself is an Urban Legend. There are several definitions of an Urban Legend, they are very close.

Here are a couple: www.elleweb.com... and www.nashville.k12.tn.us...and www.cyberalaska.com...

to name a few.

So, I hope all the people who have devoted themselves to living their entire life based upon what that book says, don't read this.

You know, I am actually a pretty fair writer. I don't mean this bantering back and forth in the forums, but give me a Bible to look through for a bit, get all my thee's, thou's, shalt's, etc... down, and could probably (although I would never be so cruel as to do so) write and publish a book entitled, "The Holy Bible, Final Edition - P.S. from God". And if no one knew any better, they would read it, and it would be gospel to them. Isn't that sad?

[edit on 3/5/2005 by CyberKat]

[edit on 3/5/2005 by CyberKat]

[edit on 3/5/2005 by CyberKat]

[edit on 3/5/2005 by CyberKat]

Lol, I couldn't agree more.

I think the very title of this thread will keep the pious people out of here, so you don't have to worry about them reading this. The sad thing is that this falls into the realm of all other religions as well. Christians will readily accept Egyptian, Greek, Babylonian, etc. as mythology, along with Islam and others, but there's NO way that Christianity falls in the same class. It's pretty funny to me...

For the record, I'm not anti-religion or anti-Christianity.

e 2 e k 1 a 7, EXACTLY what i always thought. Also, going along with truthseeka, i do think its kinda funny as well to see Catholics agree with people that are into Buddhism, yet they’re completely different, and if there is a god, its got to be one or the other, for religious people, and for the record as well, i am not anti-religion but i am anti-bible, just seems like a science/rule book for people. Again, im not anti-religion but i would try to get more people into thinking this way or any other way that may someday disprove the meaning of all religion.

Maybe the universe is in someone's eye?

You may find this slightly amusing, but i honestly thought about this today during Spanish class, which is where i do a lot of think because that class is stupid. But i did think about this and wondered what may happen if the eye were in if the person ever dies or gets it popped, will we not even notice it cause its so big to us, and i thought about it and thought of this: maybe we notice the universe is expanding because the iris or whatever the black part of your eye is called is dilating, and so its expanding, just very slowly cause its so big, ya know what i mean?

[edit on 9/3/2005 by Schmidt1989]

Your entire point is based on a joke. You state that it makes sense by merely setting religion aside to look at the issue--um, duh.

Murder makes sense when setting aside morals. Psychotic behavior makes sense when setting aside common sense. Your theory makes sense when setting aside religion.

In other words, bullcrap. The Bible is not scientific and can't be looked at scientifically. It is a matter of faith--if you don't have enough, then naturally the Bible won't reveal itself to you.

It was scientific yes, as best as they could understand it, but even then riddled with politics. Science at least evolves, I believe this is why we were given a brain. As to faith? there is nothing as stagnant, backward and debilitating as this emptiness called faith.

[edit on 3/11/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

Something that is very note worthy to check into if you dare. It will explain the truth of the bible from Creationism to Blackholes to Noahs Ark to UFO's. He has a scientific answer for everything. He explains everything in mathematical terms since he is a world known physicist whom has worked with Nasa. You definetly need an intellectual and analytical mind to grasp, but he does explain things very well. You just might need to rewind his lectures a few times to digest.

Years ago he tried debunking creation through science and mathematical probability and guess what ? His life changed for ever.

His link is: www.tennesseebill.com...

Well that's about it. Could go on and on but you need to listen for yourself. He has videos, tapes, and broadband.

Don't make a decision based on ignorance. Check it out yourself and then decide.

Have Fun !

Originally posted by southern_cross3
Your entire point is based on a joke. You state that it makes sense by merely setting religion aside to look at the issue--um, duh.

Murder makes sense when setting aside morals. Psychotic behavior makes sense when setting aside common sense. Your theory makes sense when setting aside religion.

In other words, bullcrap. The Bible is not scientific and can't be looked at scientifically. It is a matter of faith--if you don't have enough, then naturally the Bible won't reveal itself to you.

Another convert from the teachings of Neo-Jesus!

See? People do read signatures.

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
The bible is no more then an outdated scientific paper.

What's scientific about it?


If it is scientific, doesn't that mean it should be taught in public schools as well?

[edit on 11-3-2005 by saint4God]

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
The bible is no more then an outdated scientific paper.

What's scientific about it?

If it is scientific, doesn't that mean it should be taught in public schools as well?

[edit on 11-3-2005 by saint4God]

Now, that's just silly, defensive thinking. I didn't start the thread, but I think that what the author (e 2 k 1 a 7) meant, was that it was scientific back in the days when it was first written, when they really didn't have much knowledge of science. At least, not anywhere close to what advances have been made in that area now.

Do you think that subjects in school should be taught based on what was known, or thought to be known some 2000+ years ago? Or should we base what our kids are taught on more modern findings.

How do you feel about teaching kids today that the earth is flat? It was believed to be flat, many years ago, you know.

I think what Saint is trying to say is that the Bible never claimed to be a "Scientific Paper". It is a book of religion. It wasn't attempting to explain away the worlds "scientific mysteries". When it came out, there weren't people that smacked themselves on the head and said "D'oh! So THAT'S how it works!"

Originally posted by CyberKat

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by e 2 e k 1 a 7
The bible is no more then an outdated scientific paper.

What's scientific about it?

If it is scientific, doesn't that mean it should be taught in public schools as well?

[edit on 11-3-2005 by saint4God]

Now, that's just silly, defensive thinking. I didn't start the thread, but I think that what the author (e 2 k 1 a 7) meant, was that it was scientific back in the days when it was first written, when they really didn't have much knowledge of science. At least, not anywhere close to what advances have been made in that area now.

Do you think that subjects in school should be taught based on what was known, or thought to be known some 2000+ years ago? Or should we base what our kids are taught on more modern findings.

How do you feel about teaching kids today that the earth is flat? It was believed to be flat, many years ago, you know.

I believe Saint4God was being facetious. We are constantly told that the "story" of creation has no place in the education system because it is not scientific. It is difficult to understand your response.

The Bible was not and is not a scientific journal.

The Bible is the written Word of God. It begins with the Old Testament and the Jewish beliefs and prophecies about the coming of the Messiah.

The New Testament is about Jesus as related by his Apostles and their followers. It has been written by men inspired by the Holy Spirit. That does not mean that the Holy Spirit dictated what they were to say. It means that these men, in their own words, told what had been either seen with their own eyes or passed down by reliable traditions.

Then the Church, again with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit chose the books that were to become the Bible. When it was complete it was written that nothing else could be added.

So, you see, nothing scientific is involved. Perhaps you should read it for yourself.

Well, Southern, if the Bible isn't meant to be scientific, why does it try to explain things that are part of the physical universe? That, my friend, is the realm of science.

So, Mahree, let me get this straight...

The authors of the Bible first took the OT that Jews had written, added a NT to suit the Christians, then the church takes out some books and alters others, all while inspired by the Holy Spirit?

I gotta say, your post summed up some of the major reasons that I abandoned Christianity. Nice going! But, while we're talking about divine inspiration...

The Babylonian king Hammurabi created a set of laws he said were given to him by one of his gods. The Stele of Hammurabi actually shows the god giving him the laws. Sound familiar...

The Egyptian pharaohs were god-kings who ruled over their kingdoms.

Needless to say, these are only 2 examples of divine inspiration, yet you undoubtedly dismiss these as myths. What entitles you to do so? What makes your faith right above all others? Oh, God probably told you so...

I think I know what the author (e2ek1a7) was trying to say.

The bible is LIKE a scientific paper, it is no more then a theory, a guess at what and why.

Like Eintsteins theory of relativity, it is widely accepted as fact, but could be 100% wrong. The bible / religion is just a guess at why things exist. They didn't know, so there must be a God or some higher power that did it all.

And since man hasn't figured out why and what, we still have religion.

If the bible is the "word of God", then why was it written by man, for man?
And if it is the word of God, passed down to a man, then that contradicts the bible. Channeling is a form of sorcery. Therefore, written by man for man.

it's all great saying it was written by man ... and of course the whole Nastradamus (sp?) thing is possible...

BUT...

Can you explain all the prophecy in the book?

I don't see how the bible can be taken as a scientific theory that ended up being incorrect. There's nothing scientific about it in the first place. It doesn't propose a theory based on evidence and a rational methodology of investigation and thinking. Its religion. Its irrational, and can't be supported or refuted by any evidence.

The Bible is not a scientific theory, It's a history book that's been given a religious spin.

Cities of the Bible, stories of the bible and people of the Bible are historic fact. They've dug them up and found monuments to them. The stories (atleast a few) have evidence that support them.

What the authors of the Bible have done is taken stories that actually happened and gave them a god angle, saying the lord was punishing this person or that city for one reason or another.

Or they hijacked older stories to include in their idea's about their religion. The book of Job has been found in stories that predate the bible by two thousand years.

The Bible is a history book that was hijacked by religious zealots, it is NOT a scientific theory.

For GODS sake people, I am a spiritual anarchist. Defending the Bible is the last thing i'd ever imagine doing. Please don't make me do this again

Love and light,

Wupy

Whatever, those are all just YOUR opinions... it is a FACT that the bible has been used to pioneer some of the most profound thinking known to exist..

Its also very good medically.. before someone read in the bible they should wash their hands because they are "evil" or "unclean" before delivering babies..
kids were dying left and right in tonnes of cities, countries... because doctors were doing autopsies and delivering babies right after... sure its common sense now... but before someone read that CRAP in the bible people were dying ...

Originally posted by dnero6911
Whatever, those are all just YOUR opinions...

Excellant statement. May I elaborate? People, please keep in mind:

Any and everything you read or hear about God is just an opinion.

Love and light,

Wupy

if not god, where did we come from?
The bible is an answer to that question.
the bible is not just a outdated scientific paper, because it does not put forward and proof of these events.
i liked what mrwupy said. ( sorry i dont know how to do quotes)
Any and everything you read or hear about God is just an opinion.

end quote

god did not send us the bible. man wrote it. it is just a theory until proven true.


But i have one question for hard core christains.

Where did god come from?