It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Bible Still Relevant in the 21st Century? What If Anything Needs to be Changed?

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Is the Bible Out-dated or is it Still Relevant in the 21st Century? What Needs to be added or taken away from it?

Ever since the turn of this century the debate has been heating up as to whether the Bible (both Old and New Testaments) is still a viable document (after all, it was written over 2000 years ago) for living in the highly complex world of the 21st century.

Moderns have been deluged with vivid images in the media (over the past 15 years especially) that (for example) genocide is a bad thing (think all the media attention given to the atrocities of Nazi Germany), yet the Hebrew Torah demands the total genocide of certain tribes (e.g. the Amalekites) sanctioned by YHWH the clan-god of Yisro'el as if genocide is a good thing. ('You shall utterly exterminate the Amalekites from under the vault of heaven...') which command comes straight from the mouth of YHWH in the Torah, a book which is the absolute core of Judaism (and by default, Christianity).

See Deut 25:19 (And Ex. 17:14, Numbers 24:20)
“It shall be that when YHWH your clan-god gives you rest from all your enemies all around, in the Land that YHWH your clan-god gives you as an inheritance to possess it, you shall utterly exterminate the memory of the Amalekites from under the vault of heaven. Never forget it!”

see also 1 Samuel 15:3
עַתָּה לֵךְ וְהִכִּיתָה אֶת-עֲמָלֵק, וְהַחֲרַמְתֶּם אֶת-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר-לוֹ, וְלֹא תַחְמֹל, עָלָיו; וְהֵמַתָּה
מֵאִישׁ עַד-אִשָּׁה, מֵעֹלֵל וְעַד-יוֹנֵק, מִשּׁוֹר וְעַד-שֶׂה, מִגָּמָל וְעַד-חֲמוֹר.

“Now go and genocide the Amalekites, and utterly destroy everything that they have, and spare not one of them; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox, and sheep, camel and ass,” - then king Saul truck down the sons of Amalek as he was commanded but he then took mercy upon King Agag and upon some of the Amalekite animals. YHWH and the prophet Samuel harshly rebuked Saul for not fulfilling the word of YHWH in leaving some of the Amalekites alive."

What are we to make of a book that at times reads like Mein Kampf in Hebrew?

Added to this we have many ancient pre-scientific blunders and fallacious notions that are in the text of the 'holy bible' which do not square at all with modern scientific discovery, including but not limited to the ancient Levantine cosmological view of an immobile flat earth at the center of the universe surrounded by a solid Dome of heaven (Heb. Reqia'k) in which the sun, moon and stars were placed 'to give light upon the earth'. That the sky is a solid dome surrounding the earth is obviously untrue, unless all those satellites in orbit are a hoax.

Talking Snakes and Hebrew speaking Donkeys aside, what are we to make of stories like that in Joshua chapter 10 which speak of the stilling of the sun and the moon so the Hebrews could finish a battle 'and be revenged on their enemies'...? (a text which cites a book not even in the bible, the socalled Book of Yasher, or 'Book of the Straight')

אָז יְדַבֵּר יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, לַיהוָה, בְּיוֹם תֵּת יְהוָה אֶת-הָאֱמֹרִי, לִפְנֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל; וַיֹּאמֶר לְעֵינֵי
יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁמֶשׁ בְּגִבְעוֹן דּוֹם, וְיָרֵחַ, בְּעֵמֶק אַיָּלוֹן
וַיִּדֹּם הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְיָרֵחַ עָמָד, עַד-יִקֹּם גּוֹי אֹיְבָיו--הֲלֹא-הִיא כְתוּבָה, עַל-סֵפֶר הַיָּשָׁר; וַיַּעֲמֹד
הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ בַּחֲצִי הַשָּׁמַיִם

"Then spoke Joshua to YHWH in the day when YHWH delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel; and he said in the sight of Israel: 'Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Aijalon...and the sun stood still, and the moon stayed in its place, until Yisroel had avenged themselves of their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jashar? "

Or what are we to make in the 21st century of the observation in Psalms 137 that blesses those who would smash the heads of Babylonian babies against the rock face?

בַּת-בָּבֶל, הַשְּׁדוּדָה
אַשְׁרֵי שֶׁיְשַׁלֶּם-לָךְ-- אֶת-גְּמוּלֵךְ, שֶׁגָּמַלְתְּ לָנוּ
אַשְׁרֵי, שֶׁיֹּאחֵז וְנִפֵּץ אֶת-עֹלָלַיִךְ-- אֶל-הַסָּלַע

"O daughter of Babylon, who is to be destroyed happy shall he be, that repays you as you have dealt with us - yea, blessed be he who takes and bashes your babies heads against the cliffs...'

Turning to the New Testament for a minute, and putting aside the commands to give up all one's material wealth for the Kingdom, we read that men should not hesitate to castrate themselves in order to be fit for the Kingdom - certainly he did not seem to have any qualms about espousing the eunuch's way of life .

See 'Matthew' 19:12
εἰσὶν γὰρ εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες ἐκ κοιλίας μητρὸς ἐγεννήθησαν οὕτως καὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνουχίσθησαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνούχισαν ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν - ὁ δυνάμενος χωρεῖν χωρείτω.

"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from the womb, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs [singers] by others--and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

Is this a book we should be reading to our children as an example of the good life?



+1 more 
posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Sigismundus




Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the tree of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. 


I would say if anyone had respect for the Bible, they would heed the above warning.



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:21 PM
link   
Are Faith and Belief relevant to minds who don't know everything there is to know?

Yes, the Bible still has the perspective of a human in relation to everything.

Belief and Faith help a person do things better, healthier, and more gracefully.



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   
So you one of them book burnin types?



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Sigismundus

The bible is relevant as long as people roam the earth, there is but one race today that are named humans, the rest are considered sheep.. The US clearly shown they cant live by the words of the New Testament, so enforce the Old testament.. We are born with Sin, or to a modern man, instincts that lies within our human nature cannot live without laws and rules placed under obligation not rights..
As above so below is a rule you will follow, or to a common man, every kingdom has its prime before its fall..
The problem is and never is the bible, its humans..


+5 more 
posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:37 PM
link   
No, it is not relevant. Yes, it is outdated.
It needs to be filed away with ancient mythology texts, as well as "fiction."


edit on 2/7/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Sigismundus

I can't see any need to change it.

Perhaps we could do better, more current English translations that did not loose the sense and cultural understandings that the original texts had (because meaning in English is fluid when compared to the languages the scriptures were written in).

Partly, it is the applicability and cohesive message of such an ancient work (parts of which are far older, by millennia, than 2,000 years) that makes its original message so outstanding in comparison to any other literary works. To make a change is to break that uniqueness.

Also, those sections that you quoted included additions that are not in or supported by the original texts (things like YHWH being a clan-god). They were also removed from the context they were in. I'm sure I could do that with a newspaper story or "The Origin of the Species" to make them imply things they don't actually say.


edit on 7/2/2016 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

And you will stand among all the other suckers and thinking, how could they have believed in these magic fairytales, look at quantum magic, thats some real deal science..

We all know the wintersolstice happens under 3 days, how could these Bible nutties believe a man rose after 3 days, geez...

Or wait, we just reform the same story over and over and over.. But hey Atlantis existed didnt it? It wasnt a creation story, noooo... Which religions has creation stories, Big Bang theory? noooo..

Oh booy, you so smaaart...

The Bible is the only book that will ever be relevant..



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

I think we need a story that lasts at least for a millenia before swapping it again so these monkeys learn their place..

Sorry, forgot these humans..



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 07:58 PM
link   
That's kinda like asking if the Constitution is still relevant and what needs to be changed. Both are still relevant to the world we live in today. If one does not meet the way you want live why just change it right ? Make it what I want it to be be. This is the problem with the Generation of today, they want it now and they want it to be what they want it to be



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: DJMSN






This is the problem with the Generation of today, they want it now and they want it to be what they want it to be


I think i just came in my pants on that quote, spot on!



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:09 PM
link   
The bible is about as relevant as The Lord of The Rings, at least, in according to it's use.

You can still make money off of it
You can still use it for entertainment purposes
You can still use it to teach people things (like history of religion, nothing more)
You can still use it as kindling

As for morality, biological history, medical practices, earth history, the history and origin of the universe and such, we have better education for that.



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147

Somewhere human nature was lost in there, medical practices are referenced to empirical data. And Earth history, we have a theory about things older than 60.000 years, we dont know, thats a fact, a hunch is not much to go on. Same goes for the universe, first written script is 6000 years old, first relevant symbolics came around 11kya..



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

You wrote QUOTE "I would say if anyone had respect for the Bible, they would heed the above warning UNQUOTE excerpt from [Rev 22:17]

The warning placed at the end of the Apocalypse of Yohanon was meant only for that book ('to him shall be added the plagues mentioned in this book...") and not for any purported collection of scripture. Context is everything. Read it again.



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: kumiho
a reply to: Ghost147
Earth history, we have a theory about things older than 60.000 years, we dont know, thats a fact, a hunch is not much to go on.


Actually, virtually everything in existence and in the observable universe all points to a timeline in the 10's of billions. It's far more than just a hunch



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: DJMSN

You wrote QUOTE "That's kinda like asking if the Constitution is still relevant and what needs to be changed. Both are still relevant to the world we live in today. If one does not meet the way you want live why just change it right ? Make it what I want it to be be. This is the problem with the Generation of today, they want it now and they want it to be what they want it to be ..." UNQUOTE

As soon as the Constitution was ratified, it IMMEDIATELY was changed by a process known as Amendments (cf: the Bill of Rights) which then become part of the Constitution itself.

Thomas Jefferson said that every 50 years a new Constitution should be written to adapt the laws therein to the next generation and keep the idea of a Constitution relevant.

Should we do the same with the Bible in terms of Ammendments? Like should we be cutting out the racist genocidal passages and the talking snakes and the gender prejudices (e.g. Eve the female letting loose original sin into the world, and thus women must be beholden to their husbands or Paul's sexist views) ?




edit on 7-2-2016 by Sigismundus because: Stuttering computer keeyyyboarddddd



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147

And when did we start to write down empirical data on the Universe? Do we know how ? No, can we observe the Universe over a distance of billions of lightyears, sure.. Still lacks something doesnt it? If i observe a human when he is 30, take a photo, what can i tell? A bipedal, primate wearing wool from a sheep.. Thats the data isnt it?

Imagination is a real treat when it comes to reality isnt it



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:34 PM
link   
yessirr...it's paving the roadway.......for truth and supernatural help. And how about those prophecies....battin' a thousand.... " to change " was in the title, though

get the hail rid of the other versions of the book.....you know, the modern interpretations, really.
They actually went through and left out 16 verses on purpose, leaving the verses numbered the same but blocking the number of the verses left out....in Matt. somewhere verse 27 is merely denoted ....[27]...OH yes ...it just happens to be the one verse THE NORMALS would not allow to be silenced...the name deally....

so, someone really bad wants the name re-phrased, huh?!! could it be, what was that line the church chat lady would say..?? he he

edit on 7-2-2016 by GBP/JPY because: last minute thought there....yezz

edit on 7-2-2016 by GBP/JPY because: our new King.....He comes right after a nicely done fake one



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

You wrote "Also, those sections that you quoted included additions that are not in or supported by the original texts (things like YHWH being a clan-god). They were also removed from the context they were in. I'm sure I could do that with a newspaper story or "The Origin of the Species" to make them imply things they don't actually say" UNQUOTE

יהוה אלהיכם (your own god YHWH) really means 'YHWH your clan-god' (KJV The LORD your God) in that it is the clan-god of Yisro'el - just as other nations had their own gods that gave them their own lands...

see Judges 11:24

הֲלֹא אֵת אֲשֶׁר יוֹרִישְׁךָ, כְּמוֹשׁ אֱלֹהֶיךָ--אוֹתוֹ
תִירָשׁ; וְאֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר הוֹרִישׁ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ, מִפָּנֵינוּ
אוֹתוֹ נִירָשׁ

Will you not possess that which Chemosh thy clan-god gives you to possess? So whomsoever YHWH our clan-god (YHWH Elohenu) hath dispossessed from before us, them will we possess...

You can see at a glance that 'elohim' in contexts such as 'your god' or 'our god' v. 'your god' is clan-based language as the above quote suggests.

Clear as mud?


edit on 7-2-2016 by Sigismundus because: Stuttering computerr keyyyboarddddd



posted on Feb, 7 2016 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Sigismundus

I believe more in the system my people set up 11kya, but dont think it would be appreciated, but it was closer to reality than most things are today..



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join