The Holy Bible and it's relation to religions based on it.

[iamwhatiseem]

Poll is anonymous.
Indicate what you believe the Bible is, and how it relates to your religious beliefs.

 

[koshergrl]

Word of God, imbued with the Holy Spirit.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Word of God, imbued with the Holy Spirit.

Not trolling...honestly I am curious and interested in peoples religious belief and the Bible.
You say absolute word of God...who was ordained? I mean, as you probably know, the new testament gospels were written hundreds of years after the date of Christ's burial - so who was ordained when the actual authors are unknown?

 

[Wry Catcher]

God is most likely an invention by man to explain that which s/he cannot understand.

My values and behavior are not dependent on a God or fear of a hell.

If God exists, he created Man, the Earth and Disease. S/He gave man a brain and set man free.

It is up to us to make the best of a world which is both violent and dangerous and able to provide us with all we need to live a healthy, pleasurable life.

 

[Avatar4321]

I believe the Bible to contain the Word of God as it accurately reflects the original texts and is translated correctly.

Of course, the Bible also contains the words of the devil, of Good men, bad men, and the words of an ass rebuking his foolish master.

If you follow the Bible, you can know God. Because the Bible teaches us how do have personal experiences with the Divine. The Servants of God have worked in every age to prepare the people to enter into the Lord's rest. Few have listened.

 

[koshergrl]

Word of God, imbued with the Holy Spirit.

Not trolling...honestly I am curious and interested in peoples religious belief and the Bible.
You say absolute word of God...who was ordained? I mean, as you probably know, the new testament gospels were written hundreds of years after the date of Christ's burial - so who was ordained when the actual authors are unknown?

No, they weren't written hundreds of years after Christ.

And I have no idea what you mean when you say "absolute word of God...who was ordained?"

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Word of God, imbued with the Holy Spirit.

Not trolling...honestly I am curious and interested in peoples religious belief and the Bible.
You say absolute word of God...who was ordained? I mean, as you probably know, the new testament gospels were written hundreds of years after the date of Christ's burial - so who was ordained when the actual authors are unknown?

No, they weren't written hundreds of years after Christ.

And I have no idea what you mean when you say "absolute word of God...who was ordained?"

So you believe the new testament was written as events happened?
You do realize that the original text contain words and dialogue that did not exist in Christ's time? As well as the "paper" several books were written on did not exist yet. Any priest and most ministers are aware of this, that the gospels were written many years after the fact. And I am talking original writing, not later translations.

 

[Ravi]

A collection of stories, some based on facts, used to influence people.

 

[koshergrl]

Not trolling...honestly I am curious and interested in peoples religious belief and the Bible.
You say absolute word of God...who was ordained? I mean, as you probably know, the new testament gospels were written hundreds of years after the date of Christ's burial - so who was ordained when the actual authors are unknown?

No, they weren't written hundreds of years after Christ.

And I have no idea what you mean when you say "absolute word of God...who was ordained?"

So you believe the new testament was written as events happened?
You do realize that the original text contain words and dialogue that did not exist in Christ's time? As well as the "paper" several books were written on did not exist yet. Any priest and most ministers are aware of this, that the gospels were written many years after the fact. And I am talking original writing, not later translations.

You are talking the same ignorant garbage that idiots who spend too much time listening to PBS have been talking for years.

"

The fact that both conservatives (F. F. Bruce, John Wenham) and liberals (Bishop John A. T. Robinson) have penned defenses of early dating for the New Testament is a witness to the strength of the data for an early date. For example, in​

Redating Matthew, Mark and Luke, noted conservative British scholar John Wenham presents a convincing argument
that the synoptic Gospels are to be dated before 55 A.D. He dates Matthew at 40 A.D. (some tradition says the early 30s); Mark at 45 A.D. and Luke no later than 51-55 A.D.1​

German papyrologist Carsten Peter Thiede has argued that the Magdalen papyrus,
containing snippets of three passages from Matthew 26, currently housed at Oxford University, are actually the oldest fragments of the New Testament, dating from about 70 A.D.Thiede’s book,​

Eyewitness to Jesus (Doubleday, 1995), points out that the Magdalen papyrus is written in Uncial style, which began to die out in the middle of the first century. In addition, the fragments are from a codex,2 containing writing on both sides of the papyri, which may have been widely used by Christians in the first century since they were easier to handle than scrolls. Further, at three places on the papyri the name of Jesus is written as KS, which is an abbreviation of the Greek word kyrios or Lord. Thiede argues that this shorthand is proof that early Christians considered Jesus a sacred name just as the devout
Jews shortened the name of God to YHWH. This would indicate a very early belief for the deity of Christ.
​

New papyrus discoveries, Thiede believes, will eventually prove that all four gospels, even the problematic one ascribed to John, were written before A.D. 80 rather than during the mid-second century. He argues that a scroll fragment unearthed at the Essene community of Qumran in 1972 almost certainly contains a passage from Mark’s gospel and can be accurately dated to A.D. 68. In Thiede’s opinion, recent research has established that
a papyrus fragment of Luke in a Paris library was written between A.D. 63 and A.D. 67.​

​

3​

Even liberal bishop John A. T. Robinson argued in his​

Redating the New Testament that the entire New Testament was written and in circulation between 40 and 65 A.D.4 And liberal Peter Stuhlmacher of Tubingen, trained in Bultmann’s critical methodology of form criticism, says, “As a Western scripture scholar, I am inclined to doubt these [Gospel] stories, but as historian, I am obligated to take them as reliable…. The biblical texts as they stand are the best hypothesis we have until now to explain what really happened.”5​

Indeed, it is becoming an increasingly persuasive argument that all the New Testament books were written before 70 A.D.—within a single generation of the death of Christ, and probably earlier."

http://www.jashow.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/editors-choice/EC2W1102.pdf​

 

[iamwhatiseem]

No, they weren't written hundreds of years after Christ.

And I have no idea what you mean when you say "absolute word of God...who was ordained?"

So you believe the new testament was written as events happened?
You do realize that the original text contain words and dialogue that did not exist in Christ's time? As well as the "paper" several books were written on did not exist yet. Any priest and most ministers are aware of this, that the gospels were written many years after the fact. And I am talking original writing, not later translations.

You are talking the same ignorant garbage that idiots who spend too much time listening to PBS have been talking for years.

"

The fact that both conservatives (F. F. Bruce, John Wenham) and liberals (Bishop John A. T. Robinson) have penned defenses of early dating for the New Testament is a witness to the strength of the data for an early date. For example, in​

Redating Matthew, Mark and Luke, noted conservative British scholar John Wenham presents a convincing argument
that the synoptic Gospels are to be dated before 55 A.D. He dates Matthew at 40 A.D. (some tradition says the early 30s); Mark at 45 A.D. and Luke no later than 51-55 A.D.1​

German papyrologist Carsten Peter Thiede has argued that the Magdalen papyrus,
containing snippets of three passages from Matthew 26, currently housed at Oxford University, are actually the oldest fragments of the New Testament, dating from about 70 A.D.Thiede’s book,​

Eyewitness to Jesus (Doubleday, 1995), points out that the Magdalen papyrus is written in Uncial style, which began to die out in the middle of the first century. In addition, the fragments are from a codex,2 containing writing on both sides of the papyri, which may have been widely used by Christians in the first century since they were easier to handle than scrolls. Further, at three places on the papyri the name of Jesus is written as KS, which is an abbreviation of the Greek word kyrios or Lord. Thiede argues that this shorthand is proof that early Christians considered Jesus a sacred name just as the devout
Jews shortened the name of God to YHWH. This would indicate a very early belief for the deity of Christ.
​

New papyrus discoveries, Thiede believes, will eventually prove that all four gospels, even the problematic one ascribed to John, were written before A.D. 80 rather than during the mid-second century. He argues that a scroll fragment unearthed at the Essene community of Qumran in 1972 almost certainly contains a passage from Mark’s gospel and can be accurately dated to A.D. 68. In Thiede’s opinion, recent research has established that
a papyrus fragment of Luke in a Paris library was written between A.D. 63 and A.D. 67.​

​

3​

Even liberal bishop John A. T. Robinson argued in his​

Redating the New Testament that the entire New Testament was written and in circulation between 40 and 65 A.D.4 And liberal Peter Stuhlmacher of Tubingen, trained in Bultmann’s critical methodology of form criticism, says, “As a Western scripture scholar, I am inclined to doubt these [Gospel] stories, but as historian, I am obligated to take them as reliable…. The biblical texts as they stand are the best hypothesis we have until now to explain what really happened.”5​

Indeed, it is becoming an increasingly persuasive argument that all the New Testament books were written before 70 A.D.—within a single generation of the death of Christ, and probably earlier."

http://www.jashow.org/Articles/_PDFArchives/editors-choice/EC2W1102.pdf​

Not to frame the entire thread around what year the new testament was written, but I can of course rebut this with 10 other links saying something different. In nearly all accounts I have ever read the earliest text found was at some point within 50 years of Christs time. Other parts were no doubt written many years later.
To say that all of the text was written at the time the events transpired is a bit of a stretch.

 

[koshergrl]

I didn't say that.

But the general scholarly concensus now is that it was written within one lifetime of Christ. Not *centuries* later.

 

[bobgnote]

The Old Testament contains significant reference, to the exodus of Jews, from Cush, in Abyssina, to a symbiotic relationship as soldier-slaves, in Egypt, to the advent of Zionism, in the Middle East, where the proto-Israelites killed every man, woman, and child in the area of Canaan, who they could kill, to found Israel and then Judea.

The Israelites lost to invaders from Assyria and Babyon, which left Judea, oft-conquered, but never disbanded, until Hadrian ordered the region re-named Syria-Palestina, some time after the end of the 2nd revolt, 126 C.E. By then the New Testament gospels were composed, mostly from memory, of 'disciples,' who gave various accounts of what happened.

Jesus was likely sired by a Roman soldier, Pantera, he won't be resurrected but for fantasy, since memory is now generations remote, and 'the question' has been replaced, by Zionism.

The Bible is junk media, years too old, to be any good, but for comparative study, and so is the Qu'ran, which on page one exceeds biblical understanding of God. The Qu'ran goes on, after page one, so it is not perfect, but it serves many people, who are tribal, better than the Bible serves subjects, of modern governments.

Christians mess with all kinds of modern media, using the Bible and creation theory, as pretext, and Jews have to let them, since Christians support Zionist, fascist Israel, which American Jews are slowly abandoning. Too slowly. No Torah is kept, for Palestinians, since Christians are Crusading, by Zionist proxy, and Zionists are getting away with violating the separation clause, standing army clause, enumeration of powers clause, relative to 'common defense,' USCA 4, 5, 14, RICO, and the Sediton Act, minimum, with other laws violated, as needed by any criminal nuisance, in collusion.

The Bible is the written word of scribes, all long-dead. But tards are alive, all over the place.

 

[koshergrl]

Uh..yeah, whatever.

 

[Mr Natural]

A storybook that's been taken way too seriously over the ages.

 

[koshergrl]

Let's hear it for PBS ed! Woo hoo!

 

[ABikerSailor]

The first 5 books of the OT ARE the actual word of God. It's called the Torah. But, to get the actual meaning, it should be translated directly from Hebrew to whatever your first language is (mine is English). That way, there's less chance of the words getting twisted around.

The rest of the OT is rules for the Jews, as well as a written history of their people.

The NT is a bunch of stories that were written by men anywhere from 150 to 300 years after they occured.

And the KJV of the Bible? It's a heavily edited manuscript that is used to control the masses.

 

[koshergrl]

More nonsense, you ignorami are on a roll!

 

[bobgnote]

And thanks to the massive ignorance, prevalent in society, at the time of the ratification, the Founding Fathers had to compromise equality, so women and slaves didn't vote. Part of the problem is people had to learn to read, with the Bible, with all its bizarre diversion media, exploitable by creationists and any other fascist tools.

Women were so messed up, by the time they got the vote in the US, some were high-profile media persons, against legal alcohol, so a perverse mandate was formed, to put a ban on brewing and consuming alcohol, in our US Constitution. The petroleum industry took advantage of that and the Hemp Stamp Tax Act of 1938, to make sure we don't get alternative energy, but look how fundamentalists kept evolution out of US schools, until after the Russians launched Sputnik.

The Bible is media of convenience, which is used by media charlatans, to distort all other media, including that vital for education. Women have never recovered, from dependence on the Bible, of many of their own sex. This forms a tender trap, for uneducated men.

Meanwhile, petroleum industry yields all kinds of compounds, including pesticides, toluene, benzene, gasoline, Agent Orange, etc., which for women to huff is poisonous, and to breathe burned media is also poisonous. Chromosomes get broken, and children are born, without fingers, hands, feet, arms, legs, faces, skulls, etc., same as if Mom inhaled depleted uranium, which resulted from subsequent nuclear arms race media.

Sorry, Mom!

 

[Youwerecreated]

Oh boy a bunch of scholars we have here. Never mind the prediction of the destruction of Israel and the temple,and Daniel predicting when they would become a nation again. Funny thing is Israel still have no messiah nor temple.

 

[bobgnote]

I have to keep never-minding how Christians imposed a love-hate relationship, on the rest of the world, particularly on Jews.

Christians want to be like Jews, but Jews are too smart, and their posture is often slouchy. Also, Jews know Christians suck, and so Jews will let Christians know this. Christians would be trying to kill Jews, if not for Israel and Zionist fascism, which Zionist Christians and Jews both adore.

Many Jews are against Zionism:

Neturei Karta - Orthodox Jews United Against Zionism

Jews Not Zionists

But all the known TV ministers, except for blacks are for Israeli tyranny, since this represents the modern Crusades, and it translates conspiracy to violate the separation clause, into conspiracy to violate the standing army clause, of the US Constitution.

Christians don't much support the US Constitution, when they have a bogus rapture, oozing.

The Bible, with its dependence on Judaism and Catholicism is deeply flawed media, oft-abused, by people who rely on it, more than they should. Study religion, but don't worship.