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

[Ravi]

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.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Neither are mine, even though I believe in Him.

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.

And?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

That is an indication of just how stupid you are. Koine Greek has been discovered to be an actual language, and only a few terms used in the Bible are not found to exist outside the Bible in texts that are contemporary to the time when Jesus was alive.

As for the paper, since the earliest known manuscripts of the New Testament have been dated all the way back to the 2nd century, which is less than hundreds of years after Jesus died. By the 6th century there were copies of the entire New Testament in various languages all over the Roman Empire.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Why is it a stretch? Acts was obviously written as contemporary history of the early church, and Paul's letter make reference to events that happened to him personally, including being in prison. Are you saying you can prove that someone came along hundreds of years later and made it all up?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

... But tards are alive, all over the place.

And they all got stars from their teachers.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Nice to see such a fine example of scholarship.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

The real funny thing is that your interpretation of prophecy could be wrong, yet you use it to prove that the entire Bible is wrong.

 

[bobgnote]

... But tards are alive, all over the place.

And they all got stars from their teachers.

So, dog-baggity-bag, do you think Jesus was gay or bi? What evidence does the Bible offer?

Let's play a game, since youwerecreated seems to have run off. I happen to know, somebody used to be a cruise-misslie-for-Jeezus, in the Navy, and he used to go dancing, after duty, with guys, named Rantee and Ravee. So who wants to put out the dog?





Looks like Cali Girl ain't a-gonna come over here and get married, for five minutes, so watch some Carvey.

 

[FactFinder]

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

The poll is flawed. The Bible is very clear about religion.

5.James 1:27 (Whole Chapter)
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.