How literal is the bible?, page 2

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 01:57 AM

link

Originally posted by kerazeesicko
reply to post by gerg357

I hate religion as much as the next guy..but let me ask you and all the other non believers, WHY DO YOU GIVE A S**T WHAT OTHERS BELIEF SYSTEMS ARE? If you do not believe in it...then would it not be best to just move on and ummmm mind your own business.

Its only human to question. Why are you lashing out at me with your words for? I am giving my opinion with scientific explanation. Im a openminded aithiest. If there is any proof of god. Using science then i will believe it.

iamsupermanv2

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 02:16 AM

link

reply to post by gerg357

all of these questions i have asked many religious people and gotten the whole "he's jesus" answer...then i come back with the "but he is fully man, fully god, so the man laws should apply to him" to that i get a blank stare.

IF jesus is god, then i guess its one of those things we aren't meant to underestand.

but i get where you are confused, as am i. i wish i wasn't it would make things a lot easier.

Vanitas

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 02:27 AM

link

reply to post by gerg357

This is not the "wrong" place per se - but, honestly, do you really think you're going to get the answers HERE?

If these questions are genuine, if you are intellectually honest with yourself and with others, then why not read it as it should be read, as ANY document should be read: without any a priori animosity or preconceived ideas about its veracity and legitimacy?
And if something sounds unbelievable, so be it.
(But remember, those texts that you mention were prompted by events that were clearly perceived as extraordinary and super-human - so how else could the authors describe them?)

Regarding your subject line question: it is impossible to give a global answer.
The Bible is a huge book, and it is a compilation - not the work of a single author or even the concerted effort of a group of contemporary authors. Some were literal, others were not.

The New Testament, however, should be read very literally, in my opinion. Considering its message, there is no place in it for metaphors or allegories (even though many passages are interpreted as such even by Christian exegetes).

Just because a text may sound cryptic it doesn't follow that it is necessarily "symbolic".

kerazeesicko

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 03:00 AM

link

reply to post by gerg357

You will never get any answers from the hardcore believers. It is just the same as the ufonuts. Thier belief is too strong to be questioned. This entire sight( actually site but the grammer police need something to bitch about too..

) is full of junk being spread as fact without any facts to back it up. If you want proof...then search the net...there are supposed stuff on miracles or religious icons ( not only christian but icons relating to other religions) bleeding, drinking or whatever. Even pictures that show Jesus, Mary or some other religous figure. Not saying they are real but it is used by the religious as proof...same as the ufo fanatics use pics/vids as proof of alien contact.

I do not believe that aliens are visiting us because there is no evidence but lights, unknown craft(which could be military...no one knows) and delusions of abductions. Tell that to the believers and they will always give you the same old cases everytime or call you names when they can't answer questions about holes in thier stories. The only difference about the two is that the religious quote scripture and are a little nicer

.

Vanitas

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 03:30 AM

link

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
then i come back with the "but he is fully man, fully god, so the man laws should apply to him"

What "man laws"?
If you're referring to physical "laws", there are people in Tibet, to name just one example, who are "fully men" - and yet I have seen them do things that transcend the realm of the possible as established by the Western medical science.
(And I'll repeat: that's just one example - an extremely oversimplified one.)

Speaking of which... would you advocate approaching accounts about them with the same amount of condescension and, well, unabashed ignorance that many people here, on this site and elsewhere, approach Christianity with?

Maybe you wouldn't.
I know many use such double standards.
And they are not even ashamed of them - heck, some are not even aware of them.

Hypocrisy is alive and well.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by Vanitas]

gerg357

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 06:59 AM

link

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by gerg357

First: Your post is not in the wrong place.

I understand your disbelief of those miraculous events described in the Bible. I understand your resolution to believe only that which makes sense to you. I think it is a very good position to take.

I would like to add a thought for you to ponder though. No tricks, just points to consider.

Religious texts, or bibles, come in many flavors and varieties. The Christian bible to which you refer is just one example of collections of religious dogma and anecdotes. So don't pick exclusively on them.

Besides, remember about the Christian bible in particular, that a cabal of religious leaders - selected by an emperor - all had a little convention to determine which texts were going to be included in the 'bible' and which were "unworthy". How was the determination made? Consensus. Debate. Negotiation.

Of course any collection of writings is going to reflect the disagreements that existed between sect leaders.

The only real reason to consider the possibility of religious conspiracy is the nasty habit of celebrity leaders to 'use' dogma to increase their political 'relevance.'

And of course there's the perception by some that religion is simply another form of social control.

Very good point. Something to ponder. Ill give ya a star for making this point.

gerg357

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:21 AM

link

Originally posted by Vanitas

Originally posted by iamsupermanv2
then i come back with the "but he is fully man, fully god, so the man laws should apply to him"

What "man laws"?
If you're referring to physical "laws", there are people in Tibet, to name just one example, who are "fully men" - and yet I have seen them do things that transcend the realm of the possible as established by the Western medical science.
(And I'll repeat: that's just one example - an extremely oversimplified one.)

Speaking of which... would you advocate approaching accounts about them with the same amount of condescension and, well, unabashed ignorance that many people here, on this site and elsewhere, approach Christianity with?

Maybe you wouldn't.
I know many use such double standards.
And they are not even ashamed of them - heck, some are not even aware of them.

Hypocrisy is alive and well.

[edit on 28-10-2009 by Vanitas]

Man laws im referring to is. he has to grow old and die. Everything thats born on the earth grows old and dies which i guess he could have died naturally if he wasnt put to death. ok ill give you that. But what i mean by man laws or laws of the earth as i should have stated is for example. Not being able to raise the dead or cure the sick or turn water into wine. Things of a superhuman ability that defies the laws of the universe.

If you kill someone and then try to bring them back its not happening. They are dead and when i mean kill them i mean cut off thier head or blow thier brains out and they are already cold dead. There is no way to bring them back to life scientifically and even if you could. YOu would need scientists and you would need chemicals that noone has discovered or even could come up with to do this. Not by just laying your hand on them or doing whatever jesus did to make them come back.

cwt8466

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 07:40 AM

link

Originally posted by gerg357

Man laws im referring to is. he has to grow old and die. Everything thats born on the earth grows old and dies which i guess he could have died naturally if he wasnt put to death. ok ill give you that. But what i mean by man laws or laws of the earth as i should have stated is for example. Not being able to raise the dead or cure the sick or turn water into wine. Things of a superhuman ability that defies the laws of the universe.

If you kill someone and then try to bring them back its not happening. They are dead and when i mean kill them i mean cut off thier head or blow thier brains out and they are already cold dead. There is no way to bring them back to life scientifically and even if you could. YOu would need scientists and you would need chemicals that noone has discovered or even could come up with to do this. Not by just laying your hand on them or doing whatever jesus did to make them come back.

Raising the dead: the person could've been in a coma or other near-death state. Curing the sick: shamans and medicine men have been performing "miracles" for millineia. Water into wine: if I had that answer, I would be a very rich man. Mind you, these are just top-of-the-head comments, not scientific fact. I am currently enrolled in RCIA classes, and I love to question the priest on points of dogma. Drives him batty! I just suspend the window of disbelief with my copy of Wizards First Rule, and the wisdom that Rule contains!!

texastig

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:26 AM

link

Originally posted by gerg357
Ok im a aithest and maybe after reading my point here you might feel the same and you might not. But hear me out.

Jesus Christ walking on water. This is not possible physcially possible. Raising the dead and healing the sick. All of these things arent possible. What made him so special other then supposidly being gods son?

Im sorry i think jesus should he existed didnt have any kinda powers. If so why didnt other people have these powers. I really think the bible is a book of trickery. I cant walk on water. But its because of gravity. So the laws of the world would still apply to jesus wouldnt they. Wouldnt gravity affect his ability to walk on water? I just dont think theres any way a man could make the earth as big as it is in 6 days. A man a spirit whatever.

THe reason im a aithest is because i dont believe god has powers like what people say or jesus did the stuff they said he did.

So god could do anything? He could turn a stick a wood into a loaf of bread. Now think about this. What is wood composed of? And what is bread composed of. How is that possible that he could do this. Do you know the implications of the atoms and stuff involved especially the missing things that would be required to make this happen? This is the reason why i dont believe in god or jesus. I think the bible wasnt meant to be literal or maybe its not even a real bible maybe its made up.

Sorry if this is in the wrong place. ... Just my thoughts....

Jesus broke out of the devils matrix. So did the Apostles/disciples because they did miracles also. Christ was the creator and He can do anything.
Christ said that those who believe in Him will do the same works He did. The devil doesn't want those miracles around and he keeps people in his matrix so that they don't believe.
Check out this true and scientific book of miracles for a little girl who had evil spirits in her. I've authenticated the authenticity of it twice now:
hbcdelivers.s439.sureserver.com...

PSUSA

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 08:55 AM

link

reply to post by gerg357

THe reason im a aithest is because i dont believe god has powers like what people say or jesus did the stuff they said he did.

And if He didn't have those "powers", you wouldn't be an atheist? Somehow I doubt that.

How literal is the bible?

Those that say that they believe the Bible is literally true, and plenty of people say they believe this, don't have a clue. It is full of symbols, parables, etc. These teachings express the truth, but aren't literal, and are not meant to he taken literally.

Unless there are really going to be multi-headed sea monsters and talking statues that will show themselves shortly...

His own disciples didn't have a clue of what He was talking about. They didn't understand because Jesus did not convert one person while He was here. The only way they understood was when He explained the parable to them.

But understanding without Him explaining it every time didn't happen until Pentecost. Then they understood.

[edit on 28/10/09 by PSUSA]

TheRedneck

posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 01:32 PM

link

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by gerg357

If there is any proof of god. Using science then i will believe it.

The problem with this is that science is not limited by the understanding of mankind.

Imagine for a moment a time, not so long ago, before the wave nature of light was understood. Now imagine a man discovered this nature of light and built a laser. For far and wide, reports would be circulating that this man was able to cut metal with light! It would be astounding, amazing... miraculous!

Yet today, we understand the wave nature of light, and use lasers every day.

Lasers did not become possible when someone discovered the theory behind them. They were always possible. The wave nature of light has been there since light itself existed. We just didn't know how to make them.

Jesus gave up His Deity to come to us as a man, yes. But He did not give up His knowledge. He knew things that we could not understand, no matter how hard He tried to explain it. When He used that wisdom and knowledge, it was called a miracle.

Mark 16:

17: And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18: They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

This, along with the entire Book of Acts, shows that mere humans were able to do those things that Jesus did. But in order to do so, they had to have the understanding that Jesus brought, just as in order to cut metal with light, one must have the understanding of the wave nature of light.

In simpler terms: science is wonderful, but we do not yet have full knowledge. Thus, we cannot yet understand all.

TheRedneck

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.