PetriFB Posted June 1, 2006 Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 Link: The Bible and history When it is a question of events mentioned in the Bible, we can often read and hear how some researchers doubt the historicity of these accounts. This is especially so concerning the initial accounts of the fall, the Flood and the tower of Babel and miracles which appear in the gospels. These are matters, which researchers regard as unreliable. They may regard them only as legends, and they think that those accounts aren’t worth taking seriously. We are going to examine this difficult matter in this study by looking at many examples. This study has been directed expressly at such persons as who sincerely want to research this area and who struggle with this matter. In other words it has been targeted at such persons who want to know whether the events mentioned in the Bible are really historically correct. In this writing we will also try to bring out archaeological finds, because they have often confirmed those events, which are mentioned in the Bible. They have confirmed the information found only in the pages of the Bible many times: "Generally, archaeological research has undoubtedly added confidence in the truthfulness of the Bible. More than one archaeologist has noticed that his respect towards the Bible has grown with excavations carried out in Palestine (1). The archaeological evidence has, in many cases, proved the modern critics to be wrong. It has been proved in many case that these views have been based on incorrect hypotheses and unreal, fictitious views. There is no reason to belittle this genuine help from archaeological resources." (2) "It is important to understand that archaeological resources have provided a large body of evidence through diggings which indicate clearly that the Bible is not mere pious faking. To this day, none of the historical points of the Bible have been proved to be false on the basis of this evidence obtained by archaeological research." (3) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted June 1, 2006 Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 Apart from being an attempt at spam (read the rules), the poor buggers are wasting their time. Things like the the "flood" was most likely invented as an explanation of why sea shells are found on top of mountains miles away from the closest beach.This is now, scientifically, adequately explained by geology, through the raising and lowering of tectonic plates. Besides, even if the whole Antarctica (the storehouse of 90% of the planet's fresh water - in solid form) were to melt, and the whole of the Greenland ice sheet melted as well, not nearly enough water would be released to cover the world's major mountain ranges, where plenty of these shells are to be found. What other 'historic' biblical facts are to be proven? How a whale can eat a human and regurgitate him intact? How eating an apple can condemn the human race to a life of strife and hardship? Come on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetriFB Posted June 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 Apart from being an attempt at spam (read the rules), the poor buggers are wasting their time. Things like the the "flood" was most likely invented as an explanation of why sea shells are found on top of mountains miles away from the closest beach.This is now, scientifically, adequately explained by geology, through the raising and lowering of tectonic plates. Besides, even if the whole Antarctica (the storehouse of 90% of the planet's fresh water - in solid form) were to melt, and the whole of the Greenland ice sheet melted as well, not nearly enough water would be released to cover the world's major mountain ranges, where plenty of these shells are to be found. What other 'historic' biblical facts are to be proven? How a whale can eat a human and regurgitate him intact? How eating an apple can condemn the human race to a life of strife and hardship? Come on. Which one can be possible alternative; creation work of God or by accidently formed evolution? How evolution could make multiple life... eye, which can see...... heart, which can pump blood to body.. a hand which has a fingers.... Come on ....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted June 1, 2006 Report Share Posted June 1, 2006 How evolution could make multiple life... eye, which can see...... heart, which can pump blood to body.. a hand which has a fingers.... Come on ....? Here we go again. First, read something ELSE than the bible and you might end up learning what evolution is. Then we'll discuss it. Or, failing that, you could join one of the OTHER discussions on this topic that are already dying a slow death in our forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YYYY Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 Hey PetriIf you can reply rationally I will participate. There is some truth in the bible but a lot of disinformation. Lets start by telling me what you KNOW of the Council of Nicea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 The Bible begins with a creation account that is clearly untrue. This seems to me to imply a statement, by the authors, that the book isn't intended to represent any historical truth. According to this article: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/creationism/ Biblical literalism is a recent deviation from traditional christianity and is confined to members of certain christian sub-cults. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 Interesting, actually. Genesis 1 and 2 tells two different stories of the Creation, but if you take Genesis 2 out of the equation, there's no need for the whole of the New Testament in that there won't be any Original Sin. It actually seems as if Genesis 2 might have been shoehorned into the Bible to justify the new religion, Christianity. Might this have been done at Nicea as well? And if that's the case, they (the councillors at Nicea) ignored the final commands in Revelations, and they should be burnin' in hell as we speak. Yea, Verily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetriFB Posted June 5, 2006 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 Hey PetriIf you can reply rationally I will participate. There is some truth in the bible but a lot of disinformation. Lets start by telling me what you KNOW of the Council of Nicea? In first council of Nicea formed doctrine of trinity ......... In second council of Nicea was accepted honouring of images ....and then was set 22 canons........... Bible is not rational book, but spiritual book .....and is the word of God ........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 The Christian god anyway... Bible is not the book of Allah, or the book of Krishna, or buddha or whatever... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 In first council of Nicea formed doctrine of trinity ......... In second council of Nicea was accepted honouring of images ....and then was set 22 canons........... Bible is not rational book, but spiritual book .....and is the word of God ........This is not a spiritual site, but a rational site that seeks rationality of spiritualism. While it does have some spiritual benfits to those who's spirits are lifted by rational discussion with kindred spirits, the rejection of rationality for spiritualism will not get you far here at Hypography. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HydrogenBond Posted June 5, 2006 Report Share Posted June 5, 2006 I believe that the much of the nonscientfic data in the bible is meant to be taken figuratively or symbolically. In the new Testament, Christ often spoke in parables. Rather than speak directly with logic and data, he used parables so people would have to use their common sense to come to an understanding. He did not want them to just memorize, but understand. Genesis refers to the evolution of human consciousness and not the evolution of the universe. The bible's age coincides with the formation of the first human civilizations. The prehumans took a million years or more to reach this point in evolution. All of a sudden, there is science, math, religion, government, engineering, mythology, a quantum increase in population density as early cities begin to form, farming, trade, etc.. Just a few hundred years earlier there were only tribal groups, cave drawings and some stone tools. Something changed in the human brain. This first modern human is symbolized by Adam. When someone discovers something new it is usually dated on the discovery date instead of when the phenomena first formed. For example, although the American Continent has been around for millions of years it is celebrated as being discovered in 1492. When symbolic Adam appeared, he symbolized the first modern humans advanced enough to begin civilization and all that entails. His more powerful modern human brain created a new awareness of the universe around him. In essense he discovered the universe. The universe had already been around for, 15billion years, but genesis describes the discovery date when humans began to contemplate the universe. The fundamentalists don't like this interpretation of Genesis, but there is evidence in the bible. This is connected to the story of Cain and Abel. Cain was the tiller of the soil and Abel the herder of animals. When Cain kills Abel, symbolically this means farming supersedes nomadic herding (from the last ice age) and civilization appears. When Cain is about to be exiled, he is afraid and says" whomever shall come upon me, shall kill me". The question becomes, who were these whomevers Cain was afraid of, if only Adam, Eve and Cain were on the earth. The answer is the prehumans who had not yet evolved the modern human mind. God gives Cain a sign for protection. We lose track of Cain, but he probally lived among the prehumans teaching them the ways of the future. The six days of Genesis ,as the heavens and earth are created should be rephrased as taken six days to become aware of the world. An animal sniffing for food, does not take the time look at and comtemplate the world around him, unless he is looking for food or for preditors. His instinct are focused only on looking for what he is trained by nature to do. With symbolic Adam, evolving the stronger a human brain, he becomes a stranger in paradise. For example, separating the waters from the waters. Adam looks up and notices that the rain water is different that the water in the ocean. He never noticed that before. When plants appear, this symbolizes Adam noticing all the diversity of plants he never saw before. As a prehuman, he was only concerned with food plants but now he sees a wider variety of fauna. In Genesis, it has the plants appearing before the sun. Ancient people were well aware of the importance of the sun to grow plants. This order was retained so people would not take things literally but symbolically. When the sun and moon appear (become conscious), Adam notices how they move across the sky and becomes aware of their use for telling time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YYYY Posted June 6, 2006 Report Share Posted June 6, 2006 In first council of Nicea formed doctrine of trinity ......... In second council of Nicea was accepted honouring of images ....and then was set 22 canons........... Bible is not rational book, but spiritual book .....and is the word of God ........Hi PetriAs The Big Dog says Please do not start with "the bible is the word of god" This is a science forum and to make a statement like this is just going to make people walk away. If you honestly believe that, then why is there any need to discuss ANYTHING that is in the bible? It is the word of of god and that should be the end of it. How can YOU or anyone debate what you believe to be THE WORD OF GOD? It is ultimately pointless if that is your point of view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 Hi Petri,I was once a God-fearing Bible-thumper, and spent many an hour of my teens trying to rationalize the miracles, the creation, the virgin rapes, eternal life and all that. So, I really understand where you are coming from. However, I also read other stuff. Science, philosophy, history, math, science fiction, Socrates, Plato. I have to tell you this. If you step into this website armed only with "the Bible" it is going to be like showing up to a tank battle, against Abrams M1 tanks, and you armed with a dull pocket knife. Those who have experienced education, knowledge and real logic cannot be persuaded by religious pulpit-logic. It appears that all you got is a "sermon". This may not be the most receptive audience around. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 Hi Petri, I have to tell you this. If you step into this website armed only with "the Bible" it is going to be like showing up to a tank battle, against Abrams M1 tanks, and you armed with a dull pocket knife. I must say Petri that, even though I'm a believer, I must agree with Pyro on this point. Pounding on the pulpit will gain you little favor amounst our membership. Religion can however, be discussed at this forum but it must be done so in the context of; What do we know for sure about the history, I emphasize know for sure, the philosophy, the social relevance, ect, ect. I am a born again Christian but I resist preaching at this forum, it won't be properly received. So if you can't attach some historical evidence or social implications, ect, ect, to your message, I fear you will only succeed in creating much grief for yourself.....................Friendly admonition.............Infy Pyrotex 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.