Lenticular_J Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 He meant Jesus was a perfect person. And as far as we know, He pretty much was. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 Wait wait wait... "It's not meant to be taken literally" (The bible) - Lenticular J So.. that means it's meant to be interpreted? That would kinda imply that you give it your own meaning. How can it also be a rigid moral code as so many Christians profess it to be? In fact, how can it even be the word of God? Well, I suppose it could but, if it isn't meant to be taken literally, then one can simply choose how to interpret it... which in turn means you can choose your beliefs and preach them as the "word of God"? Excuse me one second but this is what I've been trying to argue for pages and pages. It's either a rigid moral code as well as literal or NOT a rigid moral code as well as interpretive. It can't be both. It's actually impossible for it to be both. Unless every single person on Earth has exactly the same interpretation. Which they don't. And don't say "Oh but only some parts are open for interpretation" - cause they aren't. Christians side step anything they don't agree with. You know that part where Jesus tells the wealthy man to sell everything he owns and give it to the poor, well Christians actually argue that Jesus infact meant "spiritually poor" and therefore they use it as justification to preach. If he meant that, the whole topic of the "wealthy man" wouldn't have been included - unless the author was trying to mislead you - but when I actually think about it, they probably were. It depends on your belief system. I don't take it literally, many people close to me don't, and it seems a lot of people here on the forums don't. Some people do. Is your life ruled completely by any of Darwin's theories? Scientific Method? No, I'm sure it isn't, because I'm not going to try and guess what you believe. It's sheer ignorance to believe everyone believes the same thing. I don't mean to take this personally, but I really hate debating with you, True. Actually, our lives ARE ruled by the scientific method, scientific laws, and the like. We just don't think about them, as they are part of our everyday life. We are bound by these laws. Darwin's theory of evolution explains life's progression, so it also rules over us. It just doesn't take control of us. We have proof that all of those laws are there, so we need not just hope or pray for them, unlike other belief systems. I don't think True ever said that we all believe the same thing. However, I'd just like to point out that if you're wrong in the way you interpret the bible, then aren't you going to hell? Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is only one "True" way to god. What if you picked the wrong way? There are so many different ways to interpret the bible, and if only one can be right, then aren't you all taking a big gamble? I'd rather not hear: "What if you're wrong and god exists?" I've heard it all before. You know what happens if I'm wrong? I go to hell, according to the bible. But hey, at least I'll have a lot of company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 To all you people bashing the Bible... I'd like to know how much of the Bible you've actually read. And I don't mean going on a website looking up arguments against the Bible that quotes certain parts of it. I mean sitting down with the actual book and reading it. Either ALL the Bible is literal, or none of it means anything. That is a fact. I would argue that it isn't a fact. Many stories and legends are not literally true but have much to offer in the way of morality and general life principles. You saying the Bible is either entirely literal or entirely false is like saying a math textbook is entirely false because of a fictional story it uses to illustrate a true mathematical principle. You have to understand that certain books are used to illustrate a certain type of truth. Math textbooks reveal truth about math, and the Bible reveals truth about God's character. Just like it's ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the mathematical principles contained in a math textbook, it is ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the principles about God's character contained in the Bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyboo2 Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 He meant Jesus was a perfect person. And as far as we know, He pretty much was. According to the bible perhaps...And no doubt he was a 'good' person- but definately exxagerated in the bible IMO. Then again we delve into the Validity of the Bible (how reliable it is and how much we can use it to explain anything) which I do not feel qualified to explain. You are better off researching the topic individually. Yeah...Some people just go out of their way to ruin other peoples fun.Sounds like Jagex to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenticular_J Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 I read in a National Geographic (or Time, or something) that they'd found records of Jesus' execution, and with that, a lot of stories of His life. I need to find it again, it was a very, very good article. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zierro Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 According to the bible perhaps...And no doubt he was a 'good' person- but definately exxagerated in the bible IMO. Then again we delve into the Validity of the Bible (how reliable it is and how much we can use it to explain anything) which I do not feel qualified to explain. You are better off researching the topic individually. I don't see why that matters though, as long as the point gets across. He could be completely fake, but the perception we got of this "perfect being" is all that matters. Do you have to believe that a real tortoise and hare raced one day, in order to get the morale of that story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Range_This11 Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 To all you people bashing the Bible... I'd like to know how much of the Bible you've actually read. And I don't mean going on a website looking up arguments against the Bible that quotes certain parts of it. I mean sitting down with the actual book and reading it. Either ALL the Bible is literal, or none of it means anything. That is a fact. I would argue that it isn't a fact. Many stories and legends are not literally true but have much to offer in the way of morality and general life principles. You saying the Bible is either entirely literal or entirely false is like saying a math textbook is entirely false because of a fictional story it uses to illustrate a true mathematical principle. You have to understand that certain books are used to illustrate a certain type of truth. Math textbooks reveal truth about math, and the Bible reveals truth about God's character. Just like it's ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the mathematical principles contained in a math textbook, it is ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the principles about God's character contained in the Bible. For future reference, I've read the bible at least twice fully and have often skimmed passages of it from time to time. That is, of course, before I stopped believing in any of it. My opinion is that the bible needs to be taken literally in every sense, especially since it's a book about how humans are created and *supposedly* holds all the answers to life in it. Yeah, I don't think there should be much room for error in that book. "He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted July 26, 2008 Share Posted July 26, 2008 To all you people bashing the Bible... I'd like to know how much of the Bible you've actually read. And I don't mean going on a website looking up arguments against the Bible that quotes certain parts of it. I mean sitting down with the actual book and reading it. Either ALL the Bible is literal, or none of it means anything. That is a fact. I would argue that it isn't a fact. Many stories and legends are not literally true but have much to offer in the way of morality and general life principles. You saying the Bible is either entirely literal or entirely false is like saying a math textbook is entirely false because of a fictional story it uses to illustrate a true mathematical principle. You have to understand that certain books are used to illustrate a certain type of truth. Math textbooks reveal truth about math, and the Bible reveals truth about God's character. Just like it's ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the mathematical principles contained in a math textbook, it is ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the principles about God's character contained in the Bible. I agree with you that it remains quite a big leap to suggest that the Bible is either literal or worthless. However there is a point behind that conclusion, but perhaps not one quite that drastic. If the Bible does illustrate certain truths that do remain ambiguous to the reader and interpretation is necessary. It does not under any circumstance invalidate the Bible, it does however appear to me to invalidate all incorrect interpretations of the Bibie, which makes any interpretation quite irrelevant to us if our aim is to find an objective moral law. Unlike the example you gave of a mathematics book using illustration to demonstrate a maths problem, the illustration in the Bible can lead to all sorts of conclusions many of which will share the same credibility. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 To all you people bashing the Bible... I'd like to know how much of the Bible you've actually read. And I don't mean going on a website looking up arguments against the Bible that quotes certain parts of it. I mean sitting down with the actual book and reading it. You have to understand that certain books are used to illustrate a certain type of truth. Math textbooks reveal truth about math, and the Bible reveals truth about God's character. Just like it's ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the mathematical principles contained in a math textbook, it is ridiculous to suggest an illustrative story invalidates all of the principles about God's character contained in the Bible. A few thoughts to ponder: -Why would you want to follow "A certain type of truth"? What purpose could that serve. If the bible is the word of god, then shouldn't it be the "Absolute" or "only" truth? -How can the bible be the word of god, and also tell about his character? What is this, his autobiograhpy? -How can we determine if the bible is true at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 -Why would you want to follow "A certain type of truth"? What purpose could that serve. If the bible is the word of god, then shouldn't it be the "Absolute" or "only" truth? It is the absolute or only truth about God's character. -How can the bible be the word of god, and also tell about his character? What is this, his autobiograhpy? Yes, it is. -How can we determine if the bible is true at all? It depends what your standard of proof is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenticular_J Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Does it have to be true? It has to do with morals and truth and spirituality, and the existence of something greater than ourselves. I've heard people say that the Bible is a metaphor for something, but I can't remember what, nor am I able to explain how it would be a metaphor. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Does it have to be true? It has to do with morals and truth and spirituality, and the existence of something greater than ourselves. I've heard people say that the Bible is a metaphor for something, but I can't remember what, nor am I able to explain how it would be a metaphor. Does it have to be true? Yes. In order for me to believe it's written about/by god then it's going to have to be true. "It has to do with morals and truth and spirituality, and the existence of something greater than ourselves." You'd better damn well believe I require proof of that statement, and if I'm going to believe in something, I need to have some proof. Even to call something morally and spiritually true, I need to have some proof that it is morally and spiritually the way to go. As for the bible being a metaphor: It seems somewhat far fetched to believe that, considering it's a bit longer than your average book. It is the absolute or only truth about God's character. That statement requires proof. Proof which is currently unavaliable. -How can the bible be the word of god, and also tell about his character? What is this, his autobiograhpy? Yes, it is. The bible is god's autobiography? HAH! I think a lot of people in your religion would take offense to that, and deem you "insane". -How can we determine if the bible is true at all? It depends what your standard of proof is. My standard of proof is something which is undeniable, unquestionable, and without any other plausable explanation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenticular_J Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 It's completely and utterly illogical that you want proof or morality and spirituality. Have you even read the New or Old Testament? Because if you haven't, I'm afraid your demandings of proof will be ignored, at least by me. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zierro Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Does it have to be true? Yes. In order for me to believe it's written about/by god then it's going to have to be true. I don't think you get his point. Toy Story wasn't based on a true story, yet it still establishes its points about not being jealous, learning to work together, and whatnot. In order to believe in the existence of God, then yes the Bible should be factual - but when it comes to morality and getting the main point across then it's different. I've heard people say that the Bible is a metaphor for something, but I can't remember what, nor am I able to explain how it would be a metaphor. To me, God is the power that controls everything which I cannot. I think of God as Mother Nature - something much greater than I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenticular_J Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Thank you for that, Zierro. I'm not the best at getting points like that across. catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 It's completely and utterly illogical that you want proof or morality and spirituality. Have you even read the New or Old Testament? Because if you haven't, I'm afraid your demandings of proof will be ignored, at least by me. I don't see how you can say that. You're basically telling me not to ask you why you believe something which has nothing backing it up besides a book in which none of the stories told inside have been prooven. Why can't I ask for proof? Basically what I'm getting out of this is; you cannot back up the bible, because there is no credible evidence for it, whereas there is incredible amounts of evidence against it, so you rule that the question is invalid. I've read through both testaments. I won't lie and say that I read the entire book cover to cover, but I got the jist of it. I ended up laughing considering the illogical stories and nonsense included in the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 I don't think you get his point. Toy Story wasn't based on a true story, yet it still establishes its points about not being jealous, learning to work together, and whatnot. In order to believe in the existence of God, then yes the Bible should be factual - but when it comes to morality and getting the main point across then it's different. Why should it be different? That's where you miss a step in logic. It's different for morality, but not for the existence for god? Why? To me, God is the power that controls everything which I cannot. I think of God as Mother Nature - something much greater than I am. I can't argue with what you believe in this sense, because it pertains to you personally, and no one else. I must, however, ask this question: What can't you control that god has to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenticular_J Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 You can't "get the jist" of something you're trying, and in my view failing, to debate. Why can't you ask for proof? Because it's faith. Faith - noun. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. How is there incredible amounts of evidence against a book I can hold in my hands? And no credible evidence for it...? :| catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 You can't "get the jist" of something you're trying, and in my view failing, to debate. Why can't you ask for proof? Because it's faith. Faith - noun. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. How is there incredible amounts of evidence against a book I can hold in my hands? And no credible evidence for it...? :| I don't know what you're talking about at this point. If I can't ask for proof, then I must pose a question to you. Why do you believe in something that has no evidence to back it up? Scientific evidence that refutes claims made in the bible: -Evolution (Speciation) -The Big Bang -Carbon Dating Claims made by the bible which have been proven inaccurate: -Earth is ~6000 years old -God created man -The was a massive worldwide flood Evidence for the bible: -.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 NoMoreDead - the Bible isn't only about creation stories. It includes moral stories too (parables and the like) which aren't necessarily meant to be "true" but are rather seen as good to live by. This is part of why many people follow the Bible. It doesn't require any proof or validation, only an acceptance of the stories as morally valuable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenshinjapan Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 You can't "get the jist" of something you're trying, and in my view failing, to debate. Why can't you ask for proof? Because it's faith. Faith - noun. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact. How is there incredible amounts of evidence against a book I can hold in my hands? And no credible evidence for it...? :| I don't know what you're talking about at this point. If I can't ask for proof, then I must pose a question to you. Why do you believe in something that has no evidence to back it up? Scientific evidence that refutes claims made in the bible: -Evolution (Speciation) -The Big Bang -Carbon Dating Claims made by the bible which have been proven inaccurate: -Earth is ~6000 years old -God created man -The was a massive worldwide flood Evidence for the bible: -.... Did it ever occur to you maybe that man/science are wrong instead of an all-knowing being? YOU! ATTEND TET EVENTS! CLICK HERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zierro Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Why should it be different? That's where you miss a step in logic. It's different for morality, but not for the existence for god? Why? Because if it wasn't like that, metaphors would never exist. The only way I can really paint the picture is to bring up fairy tales and fables. Fake, yet they teach us a lesson. There was no account of a dog walking down a bridge with a bone in his mouth, seeing his own reflection and thinking it was a different dog with a different bone, barking at his reflection because he wanted the bone, thus resulting in his bone falling out of his mouth and into the water. Even though it was fake, it still gets the point across: Be grateful for what you have. I can't argue with what you believe in this sense, because it pertains to you personally, and no one else. I must, however, ask this question: What can't you control that god has to? I cannot control the fact that I'm 17, white, tall, a male, born in the USA, etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoMoreDead Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Because if it wasn't like that, metaphors would never exist. The only way I can really paint the picture is to bring up fairy tales and fables. Fake, yet they teach us a lesson. There was no account of a dog walking down a bridge with a bone in his mouth, seeing his own reflection and thinking it was a different dog with a different bone, barking at his reflection because he wanted the bone, thus resulting in his bone falling out of his mouth and into the water. Even though it was fake, it still gets the point across: Be grateful for what you have. So your best argument is that the bible is selectivly false so metaphors can exist? Why would all the moral stories in the bible be false, and all the spiritual stories be true? What sense would that make? Why not have a true moral story in there? Why not have a false spiritual story in there? Why is it that you don't question these things? Why is it that people openly believe that an invisible man in the sky is watching over us at all times, and is all powerful and all knowing? The answer: It provides us with comfort. It helps take away our biggest fear: Dying. To think that we will live again, forever, is a way to comfort us. In biblical times, it kept people in control. Believe this and act this way, and you will move on to a better place. To be honest, I'd rather live in a better place than move on to one. I cannot control the fact that I'm 17, white, tall, a male, born in the USA, etc. etc. No, but your parents/science sure as hell can. Age: Determined by the time your parents created you. White: Determined by your parents skin color. Tall: Genetic. Male: Genetic. Born in the USA: Where your parents have chosen to live. Anything else that "cannot be controlled"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenticular_J Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 Scientific evidence that refutes claims made in the bible: -Evolution (Speciation) Theory. -The Big Bang Theory. -Carbon Dating Hardly an accurate way to date things. Claims made by the bible which have been proven inaccurate: -Earth is ~6000 years old We can't say it wasn't. We hardly know anything about times that ancient. (I actually doubt that as well, but I'm a theologian here by God!) -God created man From an evolutionary standpoint, who says God didn't create whatever we developed from? Or the Big Bang? -The was a massive worldwide flood You can't say there wasn't. At one time, the majority of the planet was covered in ice. All that melting ice had to go somewhere. Evidence for the bible: -.... I can hold it in my hand? My answers are in bold. I'd like to meet the man who says he can change a person's genetics so that their children get to choose how they are. Can science control hurricanes? Can science control planets being made? Can science control the universe's expansion? catch it now so you can like it before it went so mainstream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenshinjapan Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 I cannot control the fact that I'm 17, white, tall, a male, born in the USA, etc. etc. No, but your parents/science sure as hell can. Age: Determined by the time your parents created you. White: Determined by your parents skin color. Tall: Genetic. Male: Genetic. Born in the USA: Where your parents have chosen to live. Anything else that "cannot be controlled"? So who controlled this child's destiny on who his parents would be. I bet science can't do that. Also, wasn't there a study on the history channel where a famous man (found the sunken Titanic) discovered that the black sea had life in it at one point, proving that a major flood had happened? Science is often wrong, don't blindly accept what some "expert" writes. YOU! ATTEND TET EVENTS! CLICK HERE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now