Former Fundamentalist 'Debunks' Bible

Originally posted by Miraj

Originally posted by junglejake
What I find interesting is how many people say they've extensively studied the Bible and found it to be wrong, but when asked to stand up to someone else who has studied the Bible extensively, the examples disappear or the rebuttal ignores key points.

Even Ehrman appears not to attack the content, but instead attempts to discredit the books themselves (similar to what the OP asked us not to do -- don't go after the source, go after the content). I could be wrong; I haven't read the book and don't plan to.

Feel free to prove me wrong

Question. My virgin daughter has been raped. What is the morally acceptable thing to do with her?

Check your bible, and give me an answer.

Of course I already know the answer, I just want to see how you feel about the answer.

Herein lies one of the fundamental misunderstandings of the Bible. It is divided into the Old Testament (Laws), and the New Testament (Love, Grace, Forgiveness). Here is the basic premise: you sin, you die. Adam sinned, we all die, and you are going to die. The Old Testament is about punishment for sin. If you sin, you will receive punishment. The law was our schoolmaster to bring us to the savior, but it was a curse upon man at the same time due to man's disobedience. The last word in the Old Testament is curse. However, throughout the Old Testament, there is the thread of hope of the coming of the obedient savior. There are 333 predictive prophecies about the coming of the savior, all were fulfilled. The chance of that happening is impossible. The beginning of the ministry of the savior was predicted to the year in the book of Daniel hundreds of years in advance.

Given that no one can get to heaven in the Old Testament because of sin, mankind needed a savior. Hence, we have the New Testament, which is the coming of the savior. A Testament is a will, which takes effect upon the death of the testator. In this case, the death was that of Jesus.

While many make issues about some of the food and behavior laws, they would be wise to note that some of these laws were thousands of years ahead of modern medicine. Modern medicine found that the cause of disease was bacteria and viruses. It wasn't until about a hundred years ago or so that physicians began to wash their hands, but it was a law in the Old Testament.

While many balk at the laws against fornication and lasciviousness, we would likely be a world of far less disease if we were to follow the basic teachings of fidelity and cleanliness, and honor the sanctity of marriage and righteousness.

Originally posted by freeyourmind1111
Interesting. Also to add to the conversation, the Codex Sinaiticus is a manuscript to be looked, at as it contradicts a lot of what the modern bible we use today bible says. The Codex Sinaiticus is the oldest surviving, fully intact bible we have. It was stolen from the monks and Mt. Sinai by a man named Constantin von Tischendorf in 1859. Some quick examples of the contradictions are...The Codex does not mention the Resurrection or Ascension.The Codex has no mention of the "Father forgive them for they know not what the do" spoken from the cross and the codex does not mention the story about the woman (Mary Magadalene)who was adulterous and going to be stoned. Those are just few inconsistencies to look at, there are more. Cheers!

[edit on 15-5-2009 by freeyourmind1111]

Old does not make it right. It is hundreds of years after the events, and was written by a group of believers who were trying to undermine the original church.

cosmicfingerprints.com...

We need greater scrutiny of those things we hold sacred -- whether it be a religious text, the chronology of history, or authority.

The problem with so many people being a slave to superstition like the Bible is the loss of potential we have to make real strides in improving the world for ourselves and our children.

Imagine channeling all that time, money and energy into something like ending world hunger, curing cancer, or even space travel. We could create our own miracles, in our own lifetimes.

If we could abandon this belief that we will somehow be punished for all eternity if we question, then maybe we could come together as a species and develop a meaningful moral code, one based on humanistic principles and not some hodgepodge of ancient writings focusing heavily on dietary restrictions. But when you have such a large portion of the population believing they will receive some reward after they die if you believe in certain people or say the right words, there is little motivation to improve their current environment.

Belief in a magical sky being does not foster personal responsibility. Grace and forgiveness are like giant do-overs on a cosmic scale.

When I hear my own family spouting that geology is "nonsense" because the world is only 6,000 years old, I am embarrassed and ashamed that we have not come any further in educating people than this. We have people who reject science outright to embrace myth and superstition in the same age as we travel the universe.

I wish that most of them would at least entertain the possibility that their beliefs might be wrong, and then have some sort of realistic approach to life in the here and now. If they would open that door but a crack, we would have a real opportunity to make the world a better place.

Religion will never do this. Religion divides, it does not unite. That is why so many faiths today have different sects, all of them in disagreement with each other. . . especially Christianity.

The greatest loss surely must be the raping of our spirituality. How can someone fettered by the fears of a wrathful, vengeful, omnipotent invisible being possibly explore the divinity inherent in each one of us?

How can we possibly realize the full human potential when we are mired in delusions from our oldest myths?

reply to post by Jim Scott


So in summary: the writers of the new testament mangled and spinned the old testament to make people believe that their mythical saviour was the jewish saviour.. Despite the fact that the rabbis rejected Jesus on the main idea that.. He didn't fulfill the most important prophecies (bringing world peace being one of them).

Would of just been shorter to that.

I was simply trying to point out that the bible is actually pretty immoral.

If you want to argue seperation, then you also have to accept that your God's word is imperfect, because he made laws then later changed his mind.

reply to post by VelmaLu


This is what I was talking about earlier.

You cannot prove without a doubt that God does not exist.

If you can, then please post it.

I am looking for absolute proof from both sides.

It doesn't matter whether God exists. My point was that religion simply clouds all issues as we debate whether God wants us to eat meat or not, make the sign of the cross, wear a beard or even exists.

It's a giant waste of time and keeps us from improving the world we're in NOW.

Originally posted by jd140
If you don't follow one you will follow the other.
It implies that you either follow the religious or the atheists.
Either way your following somebodies ideology.

You know nothing about me.

Unlike you, I follow no one - or is that simple concept a bit too complicated for you? It appears so! Don't superimpose your black and white ideology onto me pal! Save it!

IRM

[edit on 16/5/09 by InfaRedMan]

Originally posted by wonderworld
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

All I can tell you is that, if your soul is empty it is more likely that evil entities enter. Not that you are a bad person. I dont know you.

Correct. You do not know me! Yet you judge me in the paragraph below! How Odd! It is not your right to judge... lest you be judged! Correct?

your description of yourself sounds more on the Athiest side, rather than Agnostic.

Really? Where did I describe myself? Can you kindly point that out? Or is it more a case of you making assumptions and marginalizing me in a passive aggressive way? Wait... don't answer that. The conclusion is obvious!

I have a few friends and family members who also fit that description and are good people. Not in God's eyes though.

Really? You asked god this did you? He personally told you this? Thought not!
Gimme a break! Meh! *rolls eyes*

IRM

It is common knowledge that the conversion of Constantine I resulted in Christianity being used as a tool to control the Roman Empire. The Church of England used the same tactic during the reign of the British Empire.

The formation of the Bible, into a single uniformed document, was commanded by the Roman Catholic Church - under the orders of Roman officials. As history has highlighted, numerous books were exempted and text was altered.

Originally posted by Gawdzilla

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
The bible is an incredible book ...

Of all the extraordinary notions contained within, timeless teachings, wisdom, love, religion is the least of them.

Don't forget the genocide, misogyny, racism, homophobia, and arrogance.

Star for the OP, btw!

You forgot pedophilia, rape, torture and incest, terrorism, witchcraft

Yes indeed "The bibles" books every child should beforced to study.

The sooner Humanity rids itself of deluded xtian beliefs, the sooner may move on and pehaps get along.

May the god of reason light your way.

If it was simply the bible that existed I would care less one way or the other on it's authenticity. I at one point in my life decided to research all known religions or at least the ones I could find to see if anything made sense in any of them a sort of one fact present in every religious Manuel.

I looked at everything from Christianity-satanic works-Wicca-Jedism (which has no manual a totally made up religion for fun but was an interesting study lol)

The one that really struck me odd was the original writings and introduction of the Satanic cult as the original predicted how man kind would fall. At first laughed thought what a bunch of BS.

The original I believe was changed to conceal these predictions in order to hide them from the mass population which normally I would care less about. Just paranoid dilutions or wishful thinking. Problem was the original was spot on, now that is just a bit odd predicting things that occur long after it's inception but that is just the tip of the ice berg. It even hints to the changing of the texts in the future which have already occurred by now. Way too much to discuss here.

After that I took the bible with a grain of salt but at the same time observing things come and go as they were told in the original Satanic stories.

I would highly suggest re-searching it yourself a few clicks on the internet won't do it. If Christians knew what was in those works we would never hear the end of it. I guess reading that stuff is voodoo to any faith but knowledge in this case is good to have. For if it is indeed true nearly all of mankind is screwed.

"Now before the bible-thumpers rush in and attack the messenger. Consider first,"

Now that made me laugh. The day a bible-thumper would consider anything rational.. forget it. But I'm with ya.

Between Christ's death and the first council at Nicea of 325 there were hundreds of Gospels kicking around... I have a book called "The lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden"(there are other collections out there as well) Some were clearly Gonstic in nature others were created to make a point and others were based on folklore and myths that had arisen about Jesus and some of the others like the Gospel of Thomas are perhaps legit.

The thing is that forgery as we know it was not considered such in the Ancient world... its a hard idea to describe but they felt that they were enhancing and rounding out what was missing.

It wasn't until the council of Nicea that any attempt was made to create a canon and the primary focus was to chose the letters, epistles and gospels that supported the orthodoxy... regardless of any validity.

And still the Catholic Bible, like the Greek and Russian orthodox bibles have more books than the protestant bibles.

Originally posted by grover
The thing is that forgery as we know it was not considered such in the Ancient world... its a hard idea to describe but they felt that they were enhancing and rounding out what was missing.

Con artists have been around since the dawn of man.. Wether a caveman tricking someone out of a portion of meat or some dudes using language to manipulate. I don't buy the 'ancient civilisations' had no concept of deceit line sorry.

reply to post by grover


"And still the Catholic Bible, like the Greek and Russian orthodox bibles have more books than the protestant bibles. "

Luther and his boys did further "cherry picking" to get the parts they wanted and discard what they didn't agree with. How can anyone see "God's hand at work" in all this?

he was on the right track when he concluded that he needed to question and study alot more to understand the inconsistencies. but there's a juncture you come to in that road that has several paths to take from there, and he chose the wrong one from what i can tell.

Sadly, this world is being held back by organised religion. There is nothing wrong with religion, per se, but the organisational structure and cult factor makes it dangerous to society.

Countless humans have been tortured and executed for not accepting the word of a religious book.

reply to post by contemplator


I didn't say that they had no sense of deceit... the truth remains however that when it came to matters religious, they had less concerns about what we would call legitimacy... every religious or mystical text from then was written by somebody and passed on as real. The composers of the books and letters of the New Testament were no different.

There are hundreds of insertions made into the bible by the scribes of the middle ages as well.

I highly recommend Robin Lane Foxes two books dealing with the period... the fascinating "Pagans and Christians: Religion and the Religious Life From the 2nd Century to the 4th Century" and "Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible".

[edit on 16-5-2009 by grover]