jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (125 posts)

Why do People Interpret the Bible through Human Philosophy?

  1. betteryou profile image80
    betteryouposted 7 years ago

    I have found several interesting topics here in this forum and I'm actually surprised by comments from some Hubbers.... I saw these comments, "I do not believe that Mary or Jesus existed at all.", "the Bible FAILS"

    Why pick up a book to read in order to look for faults therein; why not read so as to learn in order to get hold of the truth or has the purpose of learning been defeated whereby people read to spot & look for errors without coming to the knowledge of the truth.

    May be not totally surprised because the Bible actually records that, "The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God."" -- Psalm 14:1. Since "All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God..." -- 1 Timothy 3:16, I therefore put it right before the critics that it can only be divinely interpreted by the inspiration of God and not through human philosophy.

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Then why it was written, if nobody can understand it ? lol
      If it can only be devinely interpreted, is it a book only for Gods ?  yikes
      lol

      1. betteryou profile image80
        betteryouposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        When I say divinely interpreted, it means someone who is inspired and led by the Spirit of God (The Holy Spirit). The Bible is for everyone

    2. getitrite profile image80
      getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this



      What gives you, and your psychotic genocidal God, the right to insult people by prefacing them as fools because they think.  A God that requires his followers not to think is ridiculous!

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol
        agree !

      2. betteryou profile image80
        betteryouposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It's not an insult, that's the taught of man that there's no God. He knows the thoughts of man from afar even yours.

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol lol lol
          from afar !
          so god's in some place ?
          so where ?? hmm

          lol

        2. getitrite profile image80
          getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this



               You seriously think calling someone a fool is not an insult? I see a serious disconnect from reality!

          No man needs to teach me there is no god.  It is the other way around.  We have been taught by man that there is a God.  Your God doesn't know my thoughts, because He doesn't exist.  BTW, give me proof that nonbelievers are fools, or stop your insults. SHOW US FOOLS YOUR GOD.  It seems that your God is a FOOL!

          1. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
            LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            What concerns me is that you are so angry about it....If you are sure that there is no God why should you care if anyone else believes there is a God?

            And, if the Bible is nothing to you why would you care if it calls you a fool or not?  How is it that you can freely speak and freely insult, but you can't take it when it is dished out to you?

            Are you sure there is no  God or are you fighting the part of you believes He exists?

            Please, don't become enraged and call me a bunch of nasty names....remember, you are free to post a reply or not. big_smile

            1. getitrite profile image80
              getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this



              Sorry, but it is not quite as you stated.  I'm not angry that the bible states that I'm a fool, but because you, and other believers, actually believe that crap.  Many non-believers are profound thinkers, and to view them as mere fools is an abject insult! 

              How can you even reason with a fool, yet nonbeliever's weapon of choice IS reason! 

              As far as any doubt about my position on belief, I have no doubt that religion is a farce, and that the existence of a god is improbable.

        3. earnestshub profile image88
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          In that case he knows he doesn't exist! lol lol lol

    3. profile image0
      china manposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Don't you think that a book that tells you what to do and that tells you to only believe what is in itself is not a little suspicious, not even a teeny bit suspicious ?

      Why are these pages attracting so many door knockers ?  are you all from the same church or are you part of a christian online group ?

      1. betteryou profile image80
        betteryouposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        That's the whole point, to tell you what to do and how live in a morally corrupt world.

        1. Hokey profile image61
          Hokeyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          What is this world condition?
          Body is the world condition.
          And with body and form goes feeling, perception, consciousness, and all the activities throughout the world.
          The arising of form and the ceasing of form--everything that has been heard, sensed, and known, sought after and reached by the mind--all this is the embodied world, to be penetrated and realized.

        2. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Really ?
          lol
          A morally corrupt world !
          And a book is going to fix that !

          I live in a very nice world. MY WORLD . and I don't need the help of any delusional God. thank you !

          1. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
            LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            It is not the book that is the fixer....it is the person the book is about smile

            1. tantrum profile image60
              tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              and who would that be ?? hmm

        3. profile image60
          (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Considering that your bible has been the center of morality for centuries, shouldn't we be blaming it for a "morally corrupt world"?

          1. tantrum profile image60
            tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            That's right !
            so where's the OP ?
            gone for praying, I'm sure ! lol

          2. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
            LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Q,

            In a fashion you are right.  It is the Bible's fault because it identifies corruption, there is a scripture that says,

            "God's law was given so that all people could see how sinful they were. But as people sinned more and more, God's wonderful kindness became more abundant." Rom 5:20 (New Living Translation).... smile

            1. earnestshub profile image88
              earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Ah yes, here is more of gods loving kindness for us to ponder. smile

              If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through.   (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

              1. getitrite profile image80
                getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this



                Sorry, Earnest, but I think I want to meet Leslie's God, and not yours.  Her God seems so much kinder.

              2. profile image0
                Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                ...and a prophets reward is their own.
                So what.
                all prophecy is fulfilled, evident by the Word & Testimony, that is Y`shua Moshiach. Therefore no man can reward himself, for his wisdom/logic or claim rights to grace of his own doing. Only through that Testimony can one receive the gift of grace.

                who is man to deny the gift of the Spirit?
                who is man that the Spirit should consider him?
                If a man who seeks the Spirit, he is then liberated by the Spirit who testified on mans behalf, so he would no longer suffer from his own mind, his thoughts, which he trusted in.

                Else, man is a prophet to himself and to other men who call upon whatever pleases them expecting to satisfy their need; to understand things greater than themselves.

                So, what should man do? Ask for the gift, accept it freely and return to the Spirit from which that Testimony comes.
                For the Spirit testifies that men are free in grace, where as laws and ritual, hate and fear, mockery and cowardice make men slaves to their own thinking.

                The binding Testimony of the Spirit is the fruit of the Spirit:  love.

                1. Pandoras Box profile image82
                  Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  That explains alot. wink

                  1. profile image0
                    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    tongue

                    it does indeed.
                    as mentioned numerous times: the limitation of consciousness aka human logic/thinking affirms this. The "Need To Know" factory keeps its rusty gears oiled. Sad really. If -according to evolution- after 10 million years of our existence, most humans cannot complete a single thought pattern; after widespread theistic and scientific experiments, man is no better off than the day he chose to accept his consciousness as master and became a slave to it.

                    will humans ever escape the prison of their own logic?
                    one wonders...

              3. Pandoras Box profile image82
                Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                They should have enforced that one.

            2. profile image60
              (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The Bible is dead wrong, we are not sinful. Corruption is a result of religion and originated from religious thought processes.

        4. getitrite profile image80
          getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Have you actually read the bible?  Your God is one of the most morally corrupt inventions in history. 

          He drowned the entire population of the earth(excluding Noah, et al) just because they did not worship him the way he wanted them to.  Very sadistic!  Very sadistic, and abuse of power!

          He thinks you should be killed for cursing your parents. Extreme punishment for a forgivable infraction.

          He thinks it's perfectly ok for you to be a slave.

          He thinks homosexuals should be killed(after he created them)

          ...and that's just for starters.

          1. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Even if that perspective is true, nothing really anyone can do about it -accept be angry, disbelieve, shake a fist at or roar at the top of our lungs. In the end, He wins anyway, regardless of how we feel about it.

            Interesting though that He is the only deity who claimed responsibility for making mankind or giving two sh!tes about him. All other deity wannabe's see men as objects of sport and slavery.
            Only this One offers a choice.

            just a thought...

            1. getitrite profile image80
              getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this



              He wins what?  What's the inference here? Who is the "One" you refer to?  Can you, the "ONE" and I sit down for coffee, and talk about these premises of which you speak?  Or is it you, merely, spouting this from your own imagination, and trying to trick me??  Oh, I get it.  I forgot your disclaimer:   "Just a thought."

              1. profile image0
                Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                COFFEE INVITATION: sure can. no Starbucks, please.
                yet, i suppose you wouldn't show up, just like the others.
                to do so, suggests even the most minute possibility of a blip of belief in Him. If that is the case, then everyone knows He exists even though they dispute it within themselves or arenas the size of Topeka.
                On the other hand, if you need a reason to believe, then even a 'cafe Allah mode' is unnecessary. Tasty, but unnecessary.
                I am genuinely a coffee buff, so what the heck, I'm game.

                1. getitrite profile image80
                  getitriteposted 7 years ago in reply to this



                  Can't wait to meet him!!!!!   http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff258/truckthis/emoticons/thSmily-DancingTwirl.gif

                  1. profile image0
                    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    i keep seeing those funny emoticons.

                  2. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
                    LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    getitrite

                    Where do you get your animated emotions.....

                  3. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
                    LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    If you really want to meet Him, He will make Himself known....actually He already has, but you have yet to see (come to know, understand, believe in)  Him.  smile

      2. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
        LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It would be suspect if there was one group that was exempt from it dictates, but the Word says...."There is none righteous, [of their own ability], no, not one" Rom. 3:10 and "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God" Rom. 3:23

        If man had written it under his own hand, he would have exempted somebody.... smile

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Why?
          The men who wrote were trying to make you believe in a terrible God ! lol

    4. profile image60
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      It's called using critical thinking skills, without them, one will swallow any nonsense that comes along and will wind up learning nothing at all, but instead, will "believe."

    5. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Betteryou:
      "May be not totally surprised because the Bible actually records that,..."
      ..terrible English!
      What does this partial sentence mean to you? It has no meaning to me.
      TY

    6. skyfire profile image73
      skyfireposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Bible is human written book so why it has to be interpreted from other than human philosophy ?

    7. Pandoras Box profile image82
      Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      And do you believe the divine inspiration of the Book of Mormon as well? If not, why not?

      1. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
        LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I'm real fundamental....the book of Mormon....naw. Only because the author never makes any divine claims about himself beyond being inspired by God to write the book.

        1. Pandoras Box profile image82
          Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The difference being....? Besides which, bah, he had multiple and ongoing prophecies, callings, personal visitations, shoot he oughtta be right up there with Mo. ses. Moses.

    8. cromestrings profile image61
      cromestringsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      What is written today in this forum will be difficult to understand 2000 years later..  so is the Bible.

  2. Hokey profile image61
    Hokeyposted 7 years ago

    Believe nothing on the faith of traditions,
    even though they have been held in honor
    for many generations and in diverse places.
    Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it.
    Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past.
    Do not believe what you yourself have imagined,
    persuading yourself that a God inspires you.
    Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests.
    After examination, believe what you yourself have tested
    and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.


    Buddha

    1. betteryou profile image80
      betteryouposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I am not talking about imagination here and by what spirit are you actually testing?

    2. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
      LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Do we really know what Buddha died believing?

      1. Hokey profile image61
        Hokeyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Do we really know what Jesus died believing?

        Oh wait! He didn't exist! There is historical documentation of Buddha. Jesus is mentioned nowhere except the bible which is far from being accurate or even plausible.

        1. profile image0
          Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          actually, Y`shua is mentioned in both Tor`ah AND Qu`ran.
          and that concludes today's doxology.

          1. Pandoras Box profile image82
            Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            The bible, the quran and the book of mormon. All such reliable sources. The Torah doesn't really mention him.

            1. profile image0
              Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              The name "Jesus" does not, but the Hebrew word "Anointed One" and many other "names" defining manifest Elohim, all stem from Tor`ah. What bugs me is the Hebrew to Roman to Latin to Germanic based (English) translation.

              Hebrew and Arabic languages are often interpreted as "angry" when discussing things. I used to think my mum was arguing with my uncle, when if fact they were just talking about something silly. With regard to Tor`ah speech, the whole doomsday words of Elohim are just conversations about covenant.

              I once translated a Russian love poem to English, you would have thought it was a hate letter. LOL.

              1. Pandoras Box profile image82
                Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I've never yet seen an OT "messianic prediction" that really held up as refering to Jesus.

  3. betteryou profile image80
    betteryouposted 7 years ago

    When I say divinely interpreted, it means someone who is inspired and led by the Spirit of God (The Holy Spirit).

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      But God doesn't exist. So you have to be delusional to in terprete the bible !
      That must be it !
      That's why I can't find anything meaningful in there. lol

      1. LeslieAdrienne profile image83
        LeslieAdrienneposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        If you have already decided that God doesn't exist then why do you care who is or who isn't delusional?

        I believe that under neath every protest, there is a smidgen of uncertainty.... smile

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          lol
          Why all you believers think Atheists are uncertain of their beliefs ?
          I read the Bible twice and the Torah once. Could never find a real evidence of God in there. Only a lot of symbolic explanations of Man condition.

          1. earnestshub profile image88
            earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            The bible does that well. The biblical god is just a later model Zeus. Very useful to psychology for describing and identifying the human condition and psychosis. smile

            1. tantrum profile image60
              tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Yes !
              and I would like to know why believers think we are so uncertain of our beliefs.

              That looks like a very awful human condition ! lol lol

              1. earnestshub profile image88
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                The attacks along the lines of "Well why are you reading this if you are an atheist" is typical neurotic behaviour too. The premise seems to be the forum topic is religion, not religion and beliefs!
                Hate filled biblical crap and the exclusive superior position it offers is megalomania plain and simple. I know why I fight religion and so do all who don't go for a psychotic belief being spouted as "the truth".

                It is called common decency!

                1. tantrum profile image60
                  tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  And common sense.

                  Maybe they don't want to be common ! hmm

                  lol

                  1. earnestshub profile image88
                    earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    lol lol lol

                  2. Pandoras Box profile image82
                    Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Makes them feel special.

                2. calpol25 profile image78
                  calpol25posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I agree there earnest, because every time you look at the forums its always either attacking gay people, athiests, and everyone else that is not them, its just modern day nazism lol lol

                  1. earnestshub profile image88
                    earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    And each other! That is hilarious. MY god is the only god is the view held. Trouble with that is the religionists disagree with each other to the tune of thousands of religions ... all from the same book!

                    I prefer workshop manuals, the gearbox always goes in the same place .... atached to the motor.
                    I never saw the instructions vary to the degree where I am told to fit the motor in the glove box or under the sun visor! lol

                  2. Pandoras Box profile image82
                    Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    I find anyone who believes the biblical god or the christian religion to be highly offensive and insulting in and of itself. What kind of an azz must someone be to be okay with a belief that everyone else is a resister of goodness and bound to suffer an eternity in hell? It takes an especially low life form to be okay with that and call it love.

                    That said I'm much more lenient on the masses who I realize have no idea what they've gotten themselves into. But regulars of forums such as this clearly have no such excuse. With Earn and Mark around, noone here could claim ignorance of the ramifications of the christian religion.

        2. profile image60
          (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The delusional wish to propagate their delusions, make laws and run our societies and governments based on their delusions. In other words, they wish to destroy mankind.

  4. Hokey profile image61
    Hokeyposted 7 years ago

    The bible is a man made book. Nothing else. Certain people proclaim it to be truth so of course others will show it's many errors and contradictions. I myself prefer Batman. Just seems a little more plausible.

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      lol
      hi hokey !

      1. Hokey profile image61
        Hokeyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hi sweetheart. Thanks for your support and kind words. Love ya.

        1. tantrum profile image60
          tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Love you too ! smile

          this thread is soooo funnyyyy!!! lol

    2. betteryou profile image80
      betteryouposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Was it written by you?

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        We could write something better lol

        1. betteryou profile image80
          betteryouposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Scrap book?

          1. tantrum profile image60
            tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            You took your time to go to my profile !! yikes
            do you want an autograph?
            lol lol

          2. Hokey profile image61
            Hokeyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Would be the same thing. Scrap!!!!!!!!

      2. Hokey profile image61
        Hokeyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I was figuring you wrote it and this was all a publicity stunt. A little free marketing. Maybe you should try Jack and the Beanstalk. Great story. Thanks for this thread. I needed a laugh.

      3. profile image60
        (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It was written by men with no education whatsoever and who were steeped in myths and superstitions.

        Does that mean anything to you? Doesn't that set off all sorts of alarms?

        1. Hokey profile image61
          Hokeyposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I think he ran away. Took his book with him.

  5. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    lol lol lol

      Ha ha !!

  6. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    I gotta share this computer by getting off of it ..But first

      To answer the OP I would have to ask,  Why does it have to be interpreted at all?  Who first said that it has to be interpretated?   
       I think that if we could stop doin it at all; there would be much less arguement.
       Realy ...  Answer this ...
      "who first said to interpretate scripture" ???

    1. Rod Marsden profile image79
      Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I don't know who first said that it was okay to interpret scripture or, for that matter, the first person who said it was okay for people who were not part of the priesthood to have a go at interpretation. What I do know is that Martin Luther thought it was important for everyone, including people not connected with the church as church representatives, to have a go. With this in mind he translated the bible into a common language - German. Others came along and translated the bible into other common languages such as English.

      The Protestant revolution was based on the general idea that everyone who could read or could be read to in their native language had a right to understand the teachings of the bible in their own way. Of course this does not rule out guidance. It does, however, rule out dumb obedience.

      I tackle most topics from an historic angle. Human philosophy is part of the human experience and therefore part of our collective history.

      I like the freedom of making up my own mind about things and I doubt that it is now possible to put the genie back into the bottle, to stop people from reading the bible and coming to their own conclusions. You would have to go back in time and make sure movable type never came into existence for the printing press and you would have to stop the typewriter and then the P.C. from ever developing. I think that would keep you busy for a while.

      But Jerami, I know you are a level headed guy and you are not really talking about taking anyone's freedom to think for themselves away. Maybe the better and kinder answer is the fact that every time you translate something mistakes can happen. Greek does not translate exactly into Latin and Latin does not translate exactly into English or German. Translators with the very best of intentions can only, at the end of the day, do their best.

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        This proves to an extent something that I have been saying all along.
            I do not mean to offend in any way but you have just done this.  (And thank you for the compliment)
          When people begin reading anything; Their mind thinks that it already knows what is about to read and then because of this we interpret this pre conclusion upon these things that we are reading.
          I agree with these things that you said though it sounds as if you disagree with what I said.
           I did not say what you thought that I said.
           When Translation of scripture into the comon language was a great thing.
           I said "INTERPRET" which is an intirely diffrent thing all together. 
            Just came in to eat lunch  gotta eat it now  back in a few for a few.

        1. Rod Marsden profile image79
          Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I wasn't really in disagreement with you. I was just answering your question. At the same time I thought I might inadvertently misunderstand your intentions in answering the question so I was being cautious but still putting my views across. 

          With anything written the reader will reach their own conclusions and therefore their own interpretation. A farmer might understand Jesus' parables dealing with farming better than a person who has lived his or her life in a city and has never been close to the soil. A person working for the tax department  might understand the incident of Jesus dining with a tax collector better than say a person not in tax. And so it goes...Sometimes we are distanced by time and place and even occupation and we have to do our best to understand and thus interpret.

          Sifting through the words and seeing how the meaning balances should be done with some caution.

          Making changes to modernize should only be done with absolute caution. Mistakes have recently been made. I find a marked difference in the newest version of the King James bible. 'My cup floweth over' is quite different in meaning as far as I am concerned from 'my cup is full.' A full cup might be emptied but a cup overflowing if it is continuing to do so can be drunk from but never emptied so long as what is good is continuing to flow into it. This is my interpretation. Score one for the old King James bible. Back to the drawing board with the latest version. 

          Maybe interpretation is a way of keeping the publishers honest.

          1. Jerami profile image78
            Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            After rereading your earlier post I see where I might have jumped the gun a bit. 
              What I said about preconcieved ideas affecting what we are reading just struck again, I was guilty and I apologize.

               I do firmly believe that when we are reading scripture, we should always attempt to understand it with the bare minium amount of interpretation. If it makes sence as written we should not interpret it to mean something entirely diffrent just because we like that version better.
               Too many people do that.

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Jer:
              True:
              About 38k differing interpretations of the OT have created 38k differing protestant sects  (cults) worldwide....and the number is increasing as we type.
              I think it got too hot in the kitchen for the questioning hubber.

              1. Rod Marsden profile image79
                Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Well qwark there is certainly heat here but that's okay. I could do with a sun tan.

      2. AdeleCosgroveBray profile image88
        AdeleCosgroveBrayposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        smile 

        Actually, the first person who did this is named in the Bible as Paul - the guy who'd never met Jesus in person, but who took it upon himself to interpet things as he saw fit. 

        The disciples (at least those who are named as having been Jesus's pupils) disagreed with much of what Paul preached - including Paul's idea that all a person had to do was believe without question.  And thus was created the first schism of what gradually became Xtian dogma.

        1. Rod Marsden profile image79
          Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I think it was Paul who got a vision making it okay to preach to the gentiles and thus take Christianity out of just being part of Judaism. Paul founded a church on the principle that you didn't have to be Jewish or go along with what the Jews ate, etc to be a Christian. To us this is a no brainer but back then it was pretty radical stuff. He pushed the idea that the new testament was more important than the old testament and in some respects even supersedes the old testament.

        2. Pandoras Box profile image82
          Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Good point and well put.

  7. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    One of the reasons I don't read the Bible any more, is the long chapters !!
    like these long posts !
    lol

  8. profile image0
    philip carey 61posted 7 years ago

    A little knowledge is good, but one has to drink deeply. You have to read more than just the Bible to understand Christian theology and Philosophy.

    I think it will make sense when it needs to make sense. There are no atheists on the battlefield, as they say.

    Peace

  9. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    fool; foolish; foolishness:

    Simple or Naive Fool: one who is gullible; lacks the most basic understanding of moral cause and effect.

    Self-Confident Fool: stubborn; a big mouth.

    Committed Fool: who has decisively rejected wisdom, pledged his allegiance to destructive ideas and behaviors.

    Scornful Fool: a mocker, heckler who is openly contemptuous of spiritual truth and moral righteousness.

    hmmm, that defined just about all of humanity.
    what if someone is all of them?

  10. earnestshub profile image88
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    Time to hear from god himself again, just to show the love smile

    (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

         If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

    Marry your rapist sounds like another of god's great ideas!

    This sexist crud shows how women are viewed in the bible.

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Very Cool !! lol

    2. AdeleCosgroveBray profile image88
      AdeleCosgroveBrayposted 7 years ago in reply to this




      So the poor woman is condemned to live out life with her rapist?  The deity of love and compassion stikes again, hmm?

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        To be exact, this is not Elohim speaking, but Moses.
        So, let's blame the correct individual.

        The reason being is if she was removed of her virginity, she could not marry anyone else. She was then bought by the man and the duty paid to her fathers house.

        Divorce is considered unlawful because it caused bastard children, division of families and property, breaking up of the bloodlines.

        It's all old covenant and was ONLY for the Hebrews.

        btw, the word "rape" is not as we know it. It is not a violent offense. It simply meant having unmarried sex.

  11. Rayalternately profile image60
    Rayalternatelyposted 7 years ago

    Imagine a scenario where all those fanatically in favour of any particular belief are right. Then wonder whether if it would be better to share a place in their "once we're dead, it'll be brilliant" place with them, or be on fire and not have to listen to them bang on about it.

    On fire is kinda tempting! big_smile

    1. Pandoras Box profile image82
      Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah me too. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'd rather burn in hell than bend my knee to a psychotic such as the biblical god.

      1. earnestshub profile image88
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Exactly! smile

  12. Rod Marsden profile image79
    Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago

    Nowadays if you don't believe in the bible or in someone's interpretation of the bible there are places you can go where you are not only safe but can actually continue to be a functioning member of society. Australia happens to be such a place. I believe above the Mason/Dixon line in the USA is also such a place. I'm not sure about Texas. It sounds like there are quite a few free thinkers down there.

    I dread the day when religion in full force re-enters politics in my country. It may happen if Muslims get too pushy. If they do then some Christians will get pushy and before you know it you won't be able to work with someone unless you know what they do or don't believe. This would not be a great way to live. It is the way people still live in Lebanon and in parts of Indonesia and it stinks.

    for those of you who have no wish to be Christian or possibly anything I wish you well. I believe that one of Christianity's strengths in countries like New Zealand and Australia is that nowadays it doesn't harm at least physically the non-believers. I just hope that attitude lasts.

    1. Pandoras Box profile image82
      Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You're generally physically safe south of the mason-dixon, but generally speaking you're an outcast.

      1. Rod Marsden profile image79
        Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Well at least things haven't gotten as bad as I thought they had.

        1. Pandoras Box profile image82
          Pandoras Boxposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Here's an example. A lesbian senior at a high school in Louisiana I think it is, or Mississippi maybe, wanted to bring a female as her date to the prom. To avoid having that, the school board decided to cancel the prom. They did so with a statement that didn't address the reason they were cancelling, but which did ask that private citizens unite to throw their own party/dance for the graduating class of that particular school. Because that way, they wouldn't be required to invite the offensive lesbian to attend.

          I don't know what the girl's religious affiliations or sentiments are, but it's safe to guess what those of the school board are. Her schoolmates are blaming her for the cancelled prom, and there has been some harassment which has made returning to school difficult for the girl. They're not so much harassing her because she's gay, but because her request to bring a female date ruined their prom.

          Thankfully, at least her father is supporting her.

          1. Rod Marsden profile image79
            Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            I have heard about a Jewish school girl living in the bible belt. She was okay at school and was involved in sport and a lot of other social activities until they discovered her religion and that of her family. Then she was frozen out of sport and all other school social activities. She became somewhat a leper. Her younger brother was harassed physically as well as mentally. In the end the whole family left town.

            This was on a documentary about the rise of fundamentalism in the bible belt. I though it rather scary. It also showed the old monkey trial shtick returning. You know, attacks on anyone who thinks there's any substance to the theory of Evolution...As I say rather scary. 

            In a true land of the free differing religions and differing ideas on how the earth came about should be tolerated if nothing else. I guess in some places it may take courage to bring that back. No wonder you say the land of the free and the home of the brave.

    2. earnestshub profile image88
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Me too, but Australia now has a fundy opposition leader who is as mad as a wet hen. He is known as "The mad monk" to some of us.
      He wants the bible taught in schools!
      Kevin Rudd our Prime Minister, although pretty sensible so far is also a religionist. Scary!

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        you know, in all fairness, why not teach both -theism & atheism.
        an unbiased approach, allowing the kid to decide for themselves.

        {never going to happen, i know, but just a thought }

        1. profile image60
          (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

          They do teach theism in school, it's called mythology.

          1. profile image0
            Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            there you go again, Q. "Mythology" is not theism.
            If it was, then science is included, since much of it has been concluded as false or oops, we need to change that.

            BTW, how does the genetically modified food program for those starving kids around the world going? Everybody fed yet?
            Just curious.

            1. profile image60
              (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              True. Theism is mythology.

              1. earnestshub profile image88
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                smile

      2. Rod Marsden profile image79
        Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I thought religion was taught in Australian public schools but you had the choice of whether you wanted your kids to attend or not. I remember it was usually for an hour only on a Friday. You pick the church group, etc or not... Then in social studies there was comparative studies of religions from various parts of the world.

        1. earnestshub profile image88
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          True Ron, we used to call it "religious instruction" My son went to two religious schools, who did not ask him to participate in their religion in any way. Things have changed fortunately. smile

  13. profile image0
    Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago

    perhaps the textbook called bible is inaccurate, but so is every other book. anyway.

    As for corruption/sin, it was before the writing of any book and any religion. How do you explain it without referencing any of the books within it.
    Those books collective account for over 5000 years of human history and trillions of people who believe, dispute, consider and dismiss it- as well as it referencing multiple religions from three different perspectives?
    How can someone claim such a thing is dead wrong yet use it to prove their perspective of an argument.

    sounds a bit fanatical and narrow.

    1. profile image60
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      There you go.

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        changing my words doesn't support your cause nor claim, Q.
        there you go...

    2. Rod Marsden profile image79
      Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Dead wrong Twenty might be going too far...Just the occasional question mark.

      People once believed the world was flat and that proved to be not true. People once wrote about the heavenly bodies, including the moon, being perfect without tarnish or blemish because they were heavenly and belonged in God's immediate realm. Well, when people began looking through telescopes they found the moon was pock marked with craters...it was not perfect.

      What's more, it had been part of church thought that all the stars and planets and moons, etc revolved around the earth because mankind was at the centre of everything because we are THAT important. What a shock to the system when that was proven to be untrue. Just because it is written down and lots of people have believed it to be true doesn't always make it true.

      For well over a thousand years people believed there was a lost art in turning base metal into gold and that someday some alchemist will rediscover the secret. Plenty of books on alchemy and alchemists around. Paracelsus, probably the greatest alchemist of all time to possibly the exception of Newton, couldn't do it. Or as far as we know couldn't manage it but do cross your fingers...maybe the discovery of some ancient text will mean we can all eat out of gold soup bowls and cut up our chops with gold knives and forks.

      1. profile image0
        Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        LOL.
        the Midas touch?! jeje.

        1. Rod Marsden profile image79
          Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          The Midas touch? You betcha.

  14. waynet profile image49
    waynetposted 7 years ago

    Because animals have yet to talk about their feelings.

  15. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Twenty One Days  said.....
    humans ever escape the prison of their own logic?

      Believe it or not I remember thinking something similar to this as a kid looking up at the stars. You just brought back some memories ... We truly are "all" prisoners of our own mind.

  16. brianzen profile image61
    brianzenposted 7 years ago

    The human experience of pain and death is documented well enough to presume that if it happened the way the bible says, it sucked. That does leave us to wonder why it was necessary though, If I were omnipotent, I would probably just say "Nah lets just skip the suffering" and upgrade the humans.

    1. Rod Marsden profile image79
      Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      We have been told that God knows how things are going to turn out because he/she/ whatever is omnipotent. Now if you know how something is going to turn out why persist with it? Is it sort of like watching re-runs of your favorite movies and  television show episodes? I don't really understand why God finds us so entertaining but he must otherwise we wouldn't be here striving and suffering. etc.

      Yes, it would be nice if God would upgrade us all but maybe that would take away the entertainment value.

    2. profile image0
      Twenty One Daysposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well said, Brian, that was the plan.
      Humans were not supposed to suffer at all.
      The whole point of 'salvation' is simply to be upgraded, returning to the original being we were designed to be.

      A lot has happened in between which sucks, yes.
      I suppose and hope, at some point, humans will get it and escape the need to know factory and in -i think the phrase goes- a blink of an eye, be upgraded.

      1. Rod Marsden profile image79
        Rod Marsdenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Why not have humans perfect in the first place unless you enjoy the drama of them not being perfect? How can you say humans were not supposed to suffer when dealing with an omnipotent being? It doesn't wash. And the free will shtick doesn't work for me. Again it comes down to if you know they are going to mess up with free will why give it to them? Answer? To watch them mess up. Bread ands circuses God style.

 
working