How literally do you actually take the bible?

reply to post by octotom


You are placing meaning into words and scriptures that really isn't there.
This link covers the bible's teaching on sexual behaviors. Take a look: www.religion-online.org...

reply to post by mamabeth


yes i know the rationale for quoting it, but not necessarily for combining them in the same book. it isn't that they aren't related, but so different. the stoning of the adulteress is a perfect example. it suggests that the laws regarding stoning of people for their sins, are not capable of being correctly applied unless you just so happen to be jesus, which, if you think about it, kinda makes the point of the stoning laws difficult. if the point is that we are all sinful and therefore have no right to stone another, clearly this didn't start being so in jesus' time, but was always true from the time of the fall narrative in genesis.

reply to post by weinerdog


Do you think you and the father are one?

Originally posted by weinerdog
reply to post by DarknessFollows

 

Interesting. When I was 15, I was saved out of the occult by Jesus Christ.

The grass is not greener - its just different grass.

All I see is going from one "crutch" to another.

I was raised Christian. Too many things did not make sense. Did I jump to another belief? NO.

I cleared my mind and began with a clean slate. I researched and read many ancient scripts and the basis of many beliefs unencumbered - - including Atheism.

The - "I was lost and then I was found" - doesn't work for me.

I literally take the bible for what it is, and what it's(nobel) intention(s) are, and thats a compilation of human expierences. Saved and recorded so all of humanity can learn from the past. Is it the word of god? I doubt it. Is it the word of humanity aspiring to highlight the best and worst of mankind? To this I tend to agree a bit more. For me, I read it as literal stories of a time when humanity was on the verge of self awareness. Aware of there own creativity, both for good and evil.

I do not think the bible was made to be taken literally word for word, nor do I believe its useless. Above all things, it has made me question my own mortality, humanity, and for this I have become a much more diverse, inspired, and well rounded individual. And if there is a god, and I do think there is 'something', I would think this is all it could ask.

I was born and raised in a Protestant home. I completely abandoned religion at about the age of 18, and I then became an angry and narrow-minded atheist for the next 15 years. Well, allow me to qualify that last statement: Like most of self-professed "atheists" out there (and virtually all of the "atheists" I've encountered on ATS), I was not an actual atheist; rather, I was a God-hater, which is very, very different from being an atheist.

A true atheist doesn't even acknowledge God, the Bible, or things spiritual — theism has no part in an atheist's life. There are only about as many true atheists in the world as there are true theists. Which ain't many.

A God-hater, on the other hand, lives to tear apart scriptures, mock those who believe, and generally behaves like an arrogant troll. That adequately describes about 98% of the self-professed "atheists" in the world. If you eliminated the Bible and God and religion right this minute, God-haters would implode.

Which is because hating God is simply another religion. It's dependent on the existence of God.

Anyway, a God-hater is what I was, although I called myself an atheist until I was about 33 years old. It was at that time that I managed to get myself into a set of circumstances that nearly cost me my life. Without going into detail, I ended up in a very bad situation for about 2 years, a situation that saw me living hand-to-mouth, on the ragged edge of survival, with no relief and no assistance from any source.

It was during that ordeal that I noticed a number of rather peculiar — nay, phenomenal — incidents occurring in my life that changed my mind about the Universe in general and in theism specifically.

By the time I emerged back into a normal life, I was (and am) convinced that the Universe is a responsive sort of consciousness. Not necessarily a caring consciousness, but certainly a responsive one.

Intrigued with this revelation, I went back and read the Bible again, for the first time in decades, mainly to test a theory — that the people who wrote the Bible over 2000 years ago were attempting to describe the same thing that I had discovered for myself.

I came to a couple of conclusions:

1) That the Old Testament was a collection of inspired folklore that was, indeed, attempting to describe a responsive Universe, characterized therein as "God"... The Universe does provide, it does reward, it does punish, and it does respond to impassioned entreaties... It responds to our prayers, even the prayers of atheists and God-haters.

Granted, the Old Testament is a heavily edited and selectively compiled collection of ancient writings, which really don't make a lot of sense inasmuch as they are incomplete and taken out of historical context. There are a number of other contemporaneous writings that could help to clarify much of the Old Testament, but they were deliberately omitted from the Bible (look up the "lost" books of the Bible for more on this).

2) I also concluded that the New Testament is, essentially, the story of how a guy tried to tell people about the Universe as a responsive consciousness, and they killed his ass for his trouble. Whereupon, other people tried to spread the word about the responsive consciousness of the Universe, and they were similarly killed, crucified, beheaded, burned at the stake and what-have-you.

As I said earlier, the Universe may be a responsive consciousness, but it's not necessarily a caring consciousness.

I mean, it's not going to come save your ass without your having faith in it and knowing how to trigger the proper response. Even then, it's not going to respond to a grocery list of things that you want — more often, your underlying needs trigger a Universal response.

For instance, if you've dug yourself into a hole, the Universe will typically respond by filling in the hole, but it won't necessarily send you the ladder for which you prayed.

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by DarknessFollows

I disagree with you here. Doesn't jesus himself say: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Doesn't that count for all the laws?

Xtians have huge problems with that one dude, apparently jesus fulfilled the law is enough of an answer, although it only means anything to them.

Interestingly enough I've just had a discussion with a real live xtian on this subject.

Somehow the ten commandments apply to xtians but none of the other laws do.

Apparently xtians are unde "grace" what the hell that is supposed to mean only makes sense to an xtian.

I asked why xtians obey the law of not coveting another mans wife but completely ignore the far more serious crime of consuming blood.

I was told in response that the laws did not apply to gentiles, to which I responded that the unforgivable abominable crime of consuming blood applied to all men and carried the ultimate penalty.

Needless to say the response was typical, a few quotations from some totally unrelated scripture and a healthy dose of circular reasoning.

The bibles simply cannot be taken literally they contain to many factual errors, inconsistencies and contradictions.

The majority of xtians I've had contact with claim the bibles to be literal truth but within seconds of the flat earth being mentioned change their tune to inspired by god.

It would appear that many xtians have no trouble at all in informing children that the bibles were "written by god" without batting an eyelid but shamefully change tact with an informed adult.

Before I get flamed, I'm not saying that all xtians do this, but the majority of those that I have come into contact with ,do act and have acted in this disgusting manner.

reply to post by octotom

What I mean by this is that, I take the Bible at it's face value unless the language used is figurative, metaphorical, etc. Just as we do in our day to day lives.

So who decides what is metaphor,figurative or literal ?

When someone comes in from outside and says, "Boy! It's raining cats and dogs," we don't understand that to mean that animals are falling from the sky.

Unless we do

reply to post by Skyfloating

The Council of Nicea distorted large parts of the Bible. So today, some of it is divinely inspired, some of it human, and some of it has a real negative vibe and impact.

Well the problem you have there is deciding which buts were divinely inspired , did the inspired convey fully or partially the inspiration. and how much of the inspiration survived the constant editing and translations ?

Sadly once you have resolved this, then you have to provide evidence for the inspiration being that of a deity that went by the name of yawhe amongst others.

Good job there's law against handing out bibles to children then, it could really mess with their vulnerable minds.

Oops my mistake that was handguns, equally as dangerous in the wrong hands though.

The old testament, I view as historical fable. By that, I mean that it's stories that were passed down by word of mouth from ages past until they could be written. I assume that much of these stories have been embellished along the way.

The new testament existed when writing was being practiced. So I view this as more accurate.

However, there seems to be some question as to when the books of the new testament were written. So once again we have a situation where the writer may be embellishing a story to make it sound better in the retelling. But overall I view it as more accurate than the old testament.

It all depends on the text.

One can't take the whole bible to be metaphorical nor can one take it 100% literally.

Just think about it and you will know.

I view the bible as a parable in and of itself.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by moocowman
Somehow the ten commandments apply to xtians but none of the other laws do.

Point of fact, the so-called "Ten Commandments" were not 10 in number, and they weren't written for Christians.

In the Torah, Moses receives not 10 commandments from God, but 613 commandments, which very specifically detail how God's chosen people were to conduct their lives. These laws are obviously rules of physical survival, as well as of how to hold their community together in times of adversity. There are laws regarding how to eat healthily in a pre-refrigeration world (which is extremely handy, I think), as well as laws regarding how to keep from getting your ass killed — don't screw your neighbor's wife, don't screw anybody's wife, don't have promiscuous sex, don't steal, don't murder, don't lie, et cetera... These laws only make sense, if you have any interest in living to see another day in a particularly savage era of human civilization.

It always impressed me that a mere 10 commandments weren't nearly enough to govern even an individual life, nevermind governing an entire nation of people. I think that the very early Catholic Church chose the 10 commandments that it considered the most pertinent, which left it up to the Church to impose its own additional laws over its flock.

As a handy-dandy condensed guide to keeping your ass alive in the company of humans, the Ten Commandments still serve a very useful purpose.

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by Doc Velocity


and despite the unfriendliness in which they handled their women folk, ladies everywhere have judaism and later christianity to thank, for keeping them from being wiped out completely by the other religions of the time. and i'm not being facetious! the pagan religions of jesus time, both before and after, were so hard on their women folk, it's amazing that we are back to a near 50-50 population. i think the only thing that has managed to keep it equal are the wars in which men were considered the only viable participants.

female infanticide

The phenomenon of female infanticide is as old as many cultures, and has likely accounted for millions of gender-selective deaths throughout history. It remains a critical concern in a number of "Third World" countries today, notably the two most populous countries on earth, China and India. In all cases, specifically female infanticide reflects the low status accorded to women in most parts of the world; it is arguably the most brutal and destructive manifestation of the anti-female bias that pervades "patriarchal" societies. It is closely linked to the phenomena of sex-selective abortion, which targets female fetuses almost exclusively, and neglect of girl children.

www.gendercide.org...

WARNING: DON'T READ THIS ONE IF YOU'RE SQUEAMISH
women in indo-aryan societies
www.geocities.com...



[edit on 11-9-2009 by undo]

[edit on 11-9-2009 by undo]

Well, I don't so much take the Bible in a literal sense. To me, it's more of a history lesson. Instead of condemning the Bible and making fun of it, I don't see why people don't just read it and try to get something from it. Whether you believe in Christ or not, there are lots of good moral values and teachings that you can better yourself with knowing!

I for one, do believe in a Creator, maybe not in a god kinda way, as in an invisible being that waves his hands in the air to make things happen. I believe that our creator was a physcal being. ACTUALLY READ the book of Genesis. It has lots of good information. Although the validity of the book over 2000+ years can be questioned, but any piece of information more than 3 seconds old can be questioned. My personal opinion is that over time governments and such have ousted different sections of the Bible and manipulated to how, over the years, people wanted it. But at the same time, left some of the good parts in it, the creation of the world, etc...Lots and lots of good scripture ( or history lessons) that tell of "angels" ascending and descending, and chariots of fire, and all kinds of good stuff. Look at the way that a bunch of cities were destroyed, fire and brimstone from the sky, cities turned to sand. Walking and talking with God. The list goes on. One I'd like to touch on. The Virgin Mary...can we not make pregnant women without them having sex? Angels visiting people in their dreams telling them about it? There's so much more to the Bible than an imaginary magical being! I don't think it's stupid either to believe in such a thing, I mean, people believe in worse...like abortion. So all you religion haters can suck one, cause there's more to it than you think. I would recommend you try reading some of it instead of trying to be cool.

I say
*evolution from a speck of nothing - NO!
*invisible (maybe not to the naked eye) God-like being waving his
hand around - NO!
*ACTUAL physical being, maybe 10,000+ years more advanced
technology - YES!

Originally posted by undo
and despite the unfriendliness in which they handled their women folk, ladies everywhere have judaism and later christianity to thank, for keeping them from being wiped out completely

Well, yeah, and Christ really really changed the role of women, elevating them to leadership roles within his circle of disciples. The Catholic Church subsequently glorified his mother, Mary, to near-deity status. Lot of women were elevated (if not rescued) by Judeo-Christian ethic.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by DarknessFollows
reply to post by XXXN3O

 

I guess I'm a little slow...I have had discussions with my parents, fellow Christians of all sorts, though mostly evangelical, and local vicars (not sure if that is the right translation, but a preacher, in any case) In the end they got tired with me because I was always asking these awkward questions.

I had that problem, too. I was a Christian in 1971, but my roommate was a Mormon. I thought he was steering me right, since he was academically an A+ student in one of America's hardest universities. I joined the Mormon church, wasted about 20 years in the lie, and then got out. Now I am a Christian. Mormons are not. However, to stick to your point, before I became a Mormon I queried pastors and they had no good answers. That let me down.

I do take the Bible as truth. It is a complex book, and you have to know how to read and understand it. Stick to the King James Version, it is the only reliable one. For beginners, you are best off going to the book of John first.

Regarding the Old Testament laws, Jesus did away with those. However, in those days, they had different cultures and reasons for some of the things they did.

Originally posted by Jim Scott
Regarding the Old Testament laws, Jesus did away with those.

Uh, excuse me, but Christ did not "do away" with the laws of the Old Testament. Christ said, very clearly, that the Jews should hold onto those laws for dear life. Christ himself was a Jew.

What Christ did do was create a new covenant, a new contract between God and Man. Under that contract, Jesus assumed the total debt of Mankind's sin for all time. Meaning that Mankind was automatically forgiven for their multitudinous sins into perpetuity. Automatically forgiven. Forever.

God agreed to this. Well, hell, God arranged it, so of course he would agree with it.

What was Man's part of the contract? Simple. Just acknowledge the Christ, accept that he wrote and fulfilled the contract with his life, and boom you're guaranteed a parking space in paradise.

What a deal. In a sense, Jesus was the last sacrifice that Man made to God. No more burning goats on altars and things like that.

But that didn't mean the Jews (or Christians) should abandon the 613 commandments of the Torah. Those laws were and are very useful survival pointers, and Jesus wouldn't tell them to abandon those commandments.

— Doc Velocity





[edit on 9/11/2009 by Doc Velocity]

I think the Bible is a great piece of fiction and we need to separate history from legend. New technology and discoveries have revolutionized the study of the Bible and many of the claims that are written in it. And because of the new discoveries, serious doubt has been cast on many of these stories that use to be taken as historical fact.

The Bible provides a great deal of specific information about the people and events that is contained in it but there are too many discrepancies, too many significant details that are missing and specific references pertaining to cities and neighboring peoples. And it is these things that are precisely what is needed to distinguish fact from fiction.

Originally posted by Eight
because of the new discoveries, serious doubt has been cast on many of these stories that use to be taken as historical fact.

Nope, just the opposite is true. New technology and new discoveries every day are revealing the historical accuracy of the Bible. If the Bible seems inaccurate and contradictory right now, just wait a bit and see what new archaeological evidence turns up.

There's been some amazing stuff discovered fairly recently, and I'm not talking about the hoaxed tomb of Jesus or any of that nonsense.

The recent discovery of Roman artifacts with inscriptions alluding to Pontius Pilot is pretty encouraging for Bible historians. Pilot was the last authority figure who dealt with Christ. Well, hell, Pilot had him tortured and crucified.

So, now we know Pontius Pilot existed, and that is a gigantic step toward confirming the Bible's historical authenticity.

Just wait and something else will be revealed.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by Jim Scott
I joined the Mormon church, wasted about 20 years in the lie, and then got out. Now I am a Christian. Mormons are not.

Pet peeve of mine. Mormons are Christians.

I know they like to say they aren't. And Christians like to say they aren't.

But they are.