Is the Bible historically accurate?

Jump to Last Post 1-35 of 35 discussions (328 posts)
  1. profile image0
    Chasukposted 13 years ago

    If you believe that it is, do you accept its supernatural claims?

    replyreport
    1. pisean282311 profile image60
      pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      @chasuk it gets human history wrong , how can it be historical accurate...but it is accurate at some places...it inherited myths of summerians and jews...now jew archaeology is doubting their own story of wandering of jews etc...

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I've been kind of busy the past few months, otherwise that's the kind of thing I would be all over.

        What's the documentation?

        replyreport
      2. Felixedet2000 profile image59
        Felixedet2000posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        You guess what?

        replyreport
      3. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase.  Jeremiah 23: 3

        And I will be found of you, saith the LORD: and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the LORD; and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive. 29: 9

        Behold, I will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the coasts of the earth, [and] with them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and her that travaileth with child together: a great company shall return thither. 31: 8

        Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely: 32: 37

        This is that wandering Jew that was driven out of the land promised to their father's Abraham, Issac and Jacob whose name YHVH changed to Israel which means  'he shall rule as YAH'

        This re-gathering is happening all around the world tonight and the next three days especially and it will continue all through this coming year.

        Jews and 'gentile' nations being re-gathered to The Father by Ruach HaKodesh [the spirit of holiness or uncommonness/uniqueness and special becuase they will no longer live like the peoples around them without restraint on their appetites and desires].

        It's not hardly a myth because it is happening now all over the world.

        replyreport
        1. Cagsil profile image70
          Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          IF you have to quote the bible, then you have no clue about Jesus' teachings. hmm

          replyreport
          1. profile image0
            AKA Winstonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I think you overstated the case.  You could have stopped here: IF you have to quote the bible, then you have no clue

            replyreport
            1. Cagsil profile image70
              Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              lol lol I'll have to remember that AKA. wink

              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                The question is: What clue do you have that I don't?

                replyreport
          2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
            ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            If I have to quote the holy scriptures? These scriptures are prophecies written hundreds of years ago that are being fulfilled now.

            How else would I 'report' the regathering of YHVH's people without showing that what was written hundreds of years ago is now being fulfilled?

            Like this: Prophecy from the scripture written hundreds of years ago is being fulfilled in the earth now!

            That explains nothing. Showing exactly what is taking place in the earth that was foretold hundreds of years ago shows someone beyond Jeremiah, Exekial and John the Revelator had to have gotten their information from somewhere outside of their puny selves.

            I don't claim to merely follow Yeshua's teachings. That is like following a law. I have a personal relationship with the KING of kings. I am being transformed [Romans 12: 1,2] from glory to glory. Does my own humanness show sometimes, of course. But that makes Him no less proud of me.

            Religion, religious spirits condemns for not living up to the image of the 'judge'. Hence you are condemning  me for not living up to some image you have of some 'Jesus' you don't even believe it, very rich.

            How is that not just like the Christians you're trying to say are irrational for judging everyone else by their standard? You're taking the 'dead letter of the law' and trying to condemn me by judging me by an image you deem is the risen Christ you don't even believe in?

            Me and Every other person who believes in Yeshua 'Jesus' that the Ruach HaKodesh [Spirit of Holiness - separation, uncommonness] has awakened to righteousness knows His reality because He has, in some, very real way changed our lives.

            I do not merely endeavor to try to live up to anyone elses image of 'Jesus'
            I give HIM place to LIVE HIS life in and through me. I am renewing my mind daily as Romans 12:1,2 instructs. Am I perfected yet? Not by any stretch of the imagination...

            But I do know whose I am and who I am, and no one is going to change that.

            All you're doing is strengthening those that have a personal relationship with their Saviour! It's opposition that makes those that know Him stronger--hmm

            so all of your comparing any of us to an image you compare us to of a Person you don't even believe in is pointless  - it's like a boxing match that only gives the person the opportunity to really solidify what he/she believes even more.

            Faith may seem irrational to those that don't know the Person of Yeshua. Scripture explains why. The natural mind can not understand the things of the Spirit. But the Spirit reveals them to us.

            and the only spirit that fights hard to oppose Ruach HaKodesh is an anti-christ spirit

            and Ruach HaKodesh created that spirit...which fell from its place of leading worship in heaven and now tries to get those made in the Father's image to bow down and worship it---ugly thing. it is so very soon to be thrown into a pit and chained for 1000 years tongue  wink  big_smile smile

            while we who know Him rule and reign with our Messiah and King with a rod of iron...

            you can try to tell us all you want this is foolish nonsense to believe but all our hopes are hung on this and no one is going to ever, ever, ever convince us of that

            You're helping train us to rule.....big_smile  wink tongue lol    go watch
            torah dot tv to see what we're doing

            go watch Glory of Zion Chuck Pierce to see those that know HIM worship HIM that ought to make that spirit raging mad...

            and tonight watch Passion for Truth
            convince us were' irrational in our beliefs

            the KING is not merely a belief...
            He is a Person who lives within us and is also all around us
            what we call ourselves is irrelevant
            and you can use terms in derogatory manners all you want
            He is more real than you are because He is the Eternal and Everlasting Spirit of life, truth, light, etc

            and anti-christ hates him
            i know who you are

            replyreport
            1. Cagsil profile image70
              Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Untrue. It only appears that way due to the skewed understanding of what is written. Good job of you not knowing what you're supposedly to know.

              replyreport
              1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
                ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                All you're doing is continuing to give me the opportunity to learn to be more gracious in my responses. Your are defeating your own purpose there.

                replyreport
                1. Cagsil profile image70
                  Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  At least you're learning something. Which is the point to begin with.
                  Actually, I'm not, but I don't expect you to understand. I cannot defeat my own purpose because my purpose is what drives my actions which is based on Wisdom your ego won't pay attention to. lol

                  replyreport
                  1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
                    ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    ok, your purpose seems to be to bait and push and try to make people react irrationally and then point the finger to prove how irrational and crazy and dumb and idiotic they are

                    and if a person's emotions are damaged and they are in need of healing instead of condemning as it comes across--you're doing that the wrong way!

                    A lot of people were repeatedly reminded how they failed to fit another's image of 'right' or 'good' or adequate or worthwhile or whatever and all your judgement does is provoke a defensive stance.

                    Your judgement is so much more religious than you believe.

                    It just so happens because I know my Father's [who lives in me and around me and above me and beside me] acceptance and my worth in Him that He used those tactics to heal instead of to damage more...

                    replyreport
              2. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                You're not the only person who says stuff like  that, but then you don't explain. Where do we find out what we're supposed to know if we don't know where to find it?

                replyreport
                1. Castlepaloma profile image76
                  Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  RD Dawkins dose claim he is a teacher of Science,  not a scientist. He base most of our answer on science where I think science is just one branch in the tree of life. Also I think the Bible is ONE branch in the tree of life with far more wrong translations

                  replyreport
          3. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Then where can you go to learn them if not the Bible?

            replyreport
            1. Cagsil profile image70
              Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Like I have said before, strip Jesus' overall message and get rid of the mystic based inclinations. His overall message is love, compassion and mercy. That's all actually needed.

              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Yes, that's His overall message but it's not in any way divorced from faithfulness to God or following Jesus. So I repeat, where can I go to find Jesus' teachings as you tell me they are?

                replyreport
            2. jacharless profile image74
              jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Try spending some real, quality time with the Creator.
              I hear He is quite the listener and easy to reach without literary intervention.

              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Yes, but the "literary intervention" is His way of talking to us. So, we need to be quite the listeners, as well.

                replyreport
    2. oceansnsunsets profile image84
      oceansnsunsetsposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It depends on how one understands how history comes to us from so long ago.   We tend to view things from our current points of view, through the lenses of our current century.  When one studies textual criticism for instance, it can open up some understanding in regards to ancient manuscripts and history. 

      Doing a study of things we don't really doubt, like Shakespeare's manuscripts or lack of, even from the 17th century (much later than the Bible's texts) and comparing things for those really wondering, is a great place to start.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Wow. Finally, someone who understands. I've talked to a lot of people who think that everyone in the past thought just the same way we do today.

        replyreport
    3. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      There's a book called The Jesus Mysteries that I'm working my way through now. It's an interesting book with a little over a quarter of it dealing with nothing but their sources of information while they were looking into it. Interesting read though.

      I personally don't think the Bible is fact. I do think however, that it deals with the same philosophical/spiritual enlightenment that Pythagoras taught 600 years earlier.

      replyreport
    4. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      No.

      I guess I should qualify that. "Biblical archaeology" is a questionably valid field. There are good people working in biblical archaeology, but most of them are true believers, and that calls into question a lot of their discoveries because they have a built-in bias towards a positive outcome. In order for biblical archaeology to be scientifically valid, it should be performed by someone neutral; i.e., someone who doesn't have a vested interest in the Bible being true.

      There's also a lot of confirmation bias going on. For example, the claim that coral-encrusted chariot wheels were found in the Red Sea. This was taken as PROOF! that pharoah's army was wiped out but the Red Sea coming back together after Moses parted it. This conclusion was reached by photos taken of the sea floor. "Hey, those look like chariot wheels, therefore they MUST be chariot wheels, therefore the OT MUST be true!"

      The truth is, they are actually a coral whose name I forget that grows into formations that look like wagon or chariot wheels. The National Geographic society documented this.

      So, the point I was trying to make is, there may be some historical references in the Bible that are true, but that doesn't make it an accurate historical text. Gone With the Wind references historical events too, but that doesn't make it an accurate account of something that actually occurred.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, but a lot of the true believers are Jewish. That may or may not make a difference.

        But there's been a lot of finds that do support the Bible. Just a couple of years ago, somebody produced pottery that was inscribed for "Jehovah and His Ashtoreth" (something very close to that) not seeming to realize that this in fact did support history as written in the Bible.

        replyreport
        1. Mark Knowles profile image58
          Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Actually, there have been multiple discoveries by reputable archaeologists and others that disprove most of the bible.

          replyreport
          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            If every-word in the Bible is true, then those reputable are all wrong,

            After-all we are only human and humans wrote the Bible, see how I contradicted myself

            replyreport
          2. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Okay, where can I look them up?

            replyreport
            1. Mark Knowles profile image58
              Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Same place as the masses of historical evidence for Jesus.

              Where else?

              replyreport
              1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                lol

                replyreport
              2. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Well, at least I was right about you.

                Cheers!

                replyreport
                1. Mark Knowles profile image58
                  Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Of course you were right. Are you ever wrong? lol

                  Got to be right.

                  Certainly convinced me all Christians are as I thought. Thanks for validating my opinion.

                  Tell us about the historical evidence again. Oh wait..................

                  replyreport
                  1. Chris Neal profile image76
                    Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Yes, Mark, I got to be right.

                    That way we can both be right all the time separately together!

                    Strange relationship, but as long as it works for you...

                    replyreport
            2. profile image0
              Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this
              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Thank you, I will look at them.

                Mark, this is how it's done. I may be right and I may be wrong, but simply talking down to me and sneering at me will never "lead me to reason." If you read my posts and my hubs, I know you won't agree with me but I do try to avoid piontless confrontationalism. No matter which side is right, you might as well just say "I don't care about you, I just like to laugh."

                replyreport
        2. profile image0
          Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Of course, the Bible is historically accurate in many or most respects, as its authors were contemporaneous, or near-contemporaneous. So was Shakespeare, and Chaucer, and Homer. But it isn't the Bible's historical accuracy that is important.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            In a way it's very important. As Mark Knowles pointed out, supposedly there have been many refutations of the historical accuracy of the Bible and if it's historically inaccurate, then the spiritual accuracy of the book is also greatly in question. Conversely, although historical accuracy is not in and of itself a proof for the supernatural claims, they bolster the general argument.

            replyreport
            1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
              MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Now that's the problem isn't it?  If you insist that everything must be accurate to be truth then you have forced yourself into a corner.  Back to the old Noah's ark thing...  Either you must accept that the Bible is completely inaccurate on the whole Dinosaur thing...or you must invent some contrived highly improbable "dinosaur nursery" addition to the ark story... or you must believe that an entire scientific community that prides itself on accuracy has lied just to disprove the Bible.

              That kind of intellectual maneuvering to maintain complete and utter adherence to a religious text produces an inherently defensive attitude (read zealotry) that allows no room for intelligent debate and no room for individual thought or growth.  That stagnation ALWAYS leads to the eventual end of that religion and/or culture.

              In short literal Christianity is killing itself.  No text that is written by man at least 1700 years ago is going to be completely accurate... no matter how inspired it is.  If God would have written it that would be different.  If Christians can come to grips with the fact that something can have some of the minor "facts" wrong while still believing that the message the Bible carries still is true then there MIGHT be a chance that the faith will survive over a couple more hundred years.

              replyreport
              1. livelonger profile image76
                livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                It's actually all forms of fundamentalism, which I believe are all modernist movements that sprang up as a reaction to the Enlightenment.

                Sometimes they grow because of very high birthrates, but, you're right, history is littered with fundamentalist strains that didn't have the flexibility necessary to evolve and survive.

                replyreport
              2. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                As several people on this forum already know, I've kind of gamed the system. I heard from God.

                I'm a literalist. There are things I don't understand and take on faith, and I've always been upfront about that. But some things, like Noah's Ark, I do take on faith. I don't know if it was a literal six days.

                The Bible holds together remarkably well for a book that was written by so many different people over about 1500 years.

                Literal Christianity will "die" and then "come back." I saw it before, I'll see it again, and if I live long enough I'll see it again after that. The faith will not go away.

                Zealotry exists on both sides of the coin. I know, I've experienced it in these forums.

                replyreport
                1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                  MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  With all due respect I don't believe that you've literally talked to God any more than I believe that Noah literally shoved over 600 million pounds of animals on a boat smaller than the smallest freighters of today.

                  If that what gets you through the day though, have at it.  As long as you aren't trying to convince anyone but yourself then it's harmless.

                  The Bible isn't actually holding on anymore.  Literalists are in steep decline... Either the Bible will go through yet another revision soon to match changing public opinion or it will die.  Christianity is actually one of the youngest religions and the one that's losing followers quickest.

                  replyreport
                  1. Chris Neal profile image76
                    Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    With all due respect, thankfully it's not whether you believe it that determines it. Not to insult you (seriously) but the belief in or lack of belief in isn't the main principle deciding whether something exists or is true.

                    Trust me, if it were up to me and I could decide, I would not be a Christian.

                    The Bible is not "holding on" among those for whom faith or lack thereof costs literally nothing. Among those for whom faith is costly, perhaps even fatal, it gains traction. But as I said, I'm old enough, I've seen it "die" before and I'll see it "die" again and probably again, and then be rediscovered by people hungry for meaning in an increasingly chaotic world. And some of those people will even get to know the Living God!

                    In the late 60's early 70's, which I was born in 66, I heard a lot of talk about how education would prove religion false and it would fall away. Didn't happen at that time, either!

                    replyreport
        3. twosheds1 profile image60
          twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          A lot of Biblical archaeology focuses on OT events, since there are more historical references in the OT than in the NT. Therefore, if they were Jewish, they would still be subject to the same confirmation bias. It's kind of like researchers for Pfizer testing the efficacy of Viagra. The fact that they work for the manufacturer doesn't necessarily negate their findings, but it calls them into question. Any claims they make have to be verified by independent sources.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, there is a confirmation bias. But since this is verifiable, and often makes it into the secular media (I know it's a buzz phrase, and I'm sorry if it makes you grit your teeth, but I need a way to differentiate NBC from CBN) the verifications are more readily available.

            replyreport
            1. twosheds1 profile image60
              twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Too often, though, the verifiers are also believers. Have you ever read an issue of Biblical Archaeology Review?

              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Oh come on! Actually, I can't afford that magazine. I find it quite interesting. But no, I usually hear about these things through the secular/non-Christian media. And they certainly don't cite Biblical Archeology Review!

                replyreport
                1. twosheds1 profile image60
                  twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  They have it at the library. Secular media usually use believers as their source, so I just because CNN, for example, reported it, doesn't mean it was peer-reviewed by secular researchers. Actually, the media in general are among the worst sources for this kind of information. Heck, look at how they report new medical research. One day it's one thing, the next day it's something else.

                  replyreport
                  1. Chris Neal profile image76
                    Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Well, you've made a good case for confirmation bias, although it's somewhat moot as believers don't generally reject that.

                    Are there actually reliable, easily accessible and "good science" sources that lean the other way?

                    "good science" sources? You'd think someone who writes so much would have a better command of the language!

                    replyreport
        4. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Finding pottery with inscriptions doesn't prove anything from the bible, all it shows is that the authors of the bible lived in the time the pottery was made.

          replyreport
      2. AEvans profile image77
        AEvansposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Here is the deal with your comment. There are those of us who believe and those who do not and I have yet to meet one person who is unbiased which would leave the truth doubtful.


        The Bible is accurate based on many teachings and historical truths. The History channel has many documentaries on the Bible and its teachings. Its up to all of us if we believe or do not believe. I believe but that is my choice and there are those who do not believe that is okay too. When the end comes so many have a different opinion; but we who believe should never judge those who do not. smile

        replyreport
        1. twosheds1 profile image60
          twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          The History Channel also has a series called "Ancient Aliens" which is total bollocks. Just because it's been on The History Channel doesn't make it true.

          Like I said before, just because it contains some historical references doesn't make it true.

          replyreport
    5. Chris Neal profile image76
      Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, and yes.

      replyreport
    6. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't believe it's completely historically accurate. I don't believe it is completely historically inaccurate. Which means, I hold no belief.

      I know from what I've learned that is a two part historical mythology book. The first part(OT) was stolen from another religion and if copyright laws were in effect then the Christianity religion would be guilty of that crime. The NT was written by a liar who faked this own transformation and interpreted Jesus' teachings without actually learning them. The Philosophy used by S/Paul was based on mysticism and is intellectual dishonesty.

      I know from what I've learned that you can use it as a guide for understanding human development centuries ago. The only thing it really points out is the greedy will always find a way to fool/lie to the masses, so as to sell them a pipe dream and it charts the human species consciousness level(from tests which have been done on the gospels in past years).

      replyreport
    7. nightwork4 profile image59
      nightwork4posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      i watched a documentary a few weeks ago about the bible. it amazed me to find out that there is a very small chance that jesus was a carpenter. the professor said that there were very few carpenters in that area of the world at that time in history. he feels that if anything, jesus would have been a stone mason.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        So the Gospel writer was lying?

        replyreport
        1. nightwork4 profile image59
          nightwork4posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          did i say that the bible was lying, i don't think so. read what i said with an open mind if you want to be on here.i stated that the historian said it was very unlikely.

          replyreport
          1. artblack01 profile image61
            artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So if the bible says that Jesus was a carpenter and the historian says Jesus couldn't have been a carpenter he had to be a stone mason it means one of two things. That either Jesus is fictional or the historian is lying... Hmmm, any other options?

            replyreport
      2. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        What documentary was that?

        replyreport
        1. nightwork4 profile image59
          nightwork4posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          it was on the history channel.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I don't have cable. Is it something I could look for at the library? Do you remember the name of it?

            replyreport
    8. jacharless profile image74
      jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      As for biblical accuracy regarding these 'super-natural' events, there is little reason to doubt them. Why? Well, for one, the Torah, which makes up nearly 80% of the canonized text, was written and preserved long before the 14th century church got hold of the transcripts. 4000, even 6000 years ago, people had no reason to document events that never happened. It really served no purpose. Yet, Torah records great amounts of events this particular people went through, good and bad. There are little in the way of reservations within the text -from mentions of mass murders, to incest, rape, war, chronology, law, health, social behavior, apothecary/alchemy, engineering, economics, slavery, medicine -right up to deliverance. I highly doubt the super-natural elements were thrown in for 'flavor' because the texts are vivid enough regardless.


      The 'super-natural' is merely an elevated state of human ability {i.e. running fast as chariots, pressing pillars apart, calling fire down from the heavens} on the natural level. An elevated state we should all be living. I for one have personally experienced this with regards to health and a few other instances, all very rational, real and explainable by myself and others. Granted, what some deem as super-natural are simply pseudo-suggestive or transfix-hypnotic suggestion, which I am also very familiar with -having witnessed it for several years on both a small and grand scale. Watching upwards of 10,000 people hypnotically inducing into thinking they had this 'power' is no small thing.
      So, not being a stranger to either, would concede it is very different than what most assume or have been taught. Which is sad, really, because the purpose of the documents is to provide insight to what others did or did not do, that shaped the world and ways.

      Funny, this thread was opened, because I recently reflected on a friend who actually has a double PhD in history from UC Berkeley. He would probably swat me for even engaging the conversation, and would immediately say something to the effect of "Go ahead, Philo-boy, try to change what's happened or use it for tomorrows betterment. The future and past don't actually exist. You're chasing your own tail. What argument can there be for either -the historian or forecaster?  Now, pour me a glass of red and let's eat, I'm starved!"

      James

      replyreport
      1. profile image0
        Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        What an odd, substanceless assertion.

        replyreport
        1. jacharless profile image74
          jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          In your opinion? Well, that is acceptable then. Shallow and indifferent, but acceptable.

          As said, am speaking of Torah, not the Bible -although canonized for Anglo-Saxon readers. Many parts of Torah do not even appear in the Bible.
          Beyond that, there is nothing to suggest the Hebrews mis-spoke their history nor elaborated {fabricated} it, given the nature of the text.

          In your opinion, what basis exists for them to misrepresent their own historical account?

          James.

          replyreport
          1. profile image0
            Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            First, thanks for the inexplicable and unwarranted insults. Second, all of the Torah appears in the Bible. Third, neither the Torah nor the Bible were canonized for Anglo-Saxon readers. The Anglo-Saxons spoke and wrote Old English. Even the earliest canonization did not occur until after the development of Middle English.

            You are arguing from incredulity, AKA lack of imagination. You can't imagine that X is true -- that the authors of the Torah embellished the historical record -- therefore it must be false.

            Such embellishment is common in the sacred texts of all religions, and in secular historical texts of all periods. A sacred text is often historical only incidentally. The point of such texts is usually documenting and advocating the faith of the believers who wrote it, after all. Unless you sincerely believe that the Codex Regius, the Prose Edda, the Mahabharata, etc., all truthfully recount the real-life adventures of multiple actually-existent deities, of course.

            replyreport
            1. livelonger profile image76
              livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              That's right, and, frankly, an uncontroversial idea in (non-Orthodox) Jewish circles. In my Torah study class, we learned that the Jewish (and Christian) creation myth has its roots in the Babylonian Enuma Elish (initial creation) and Epic of Gilgamesh (the flood). The Exodus either did not occur, or was only a small band of people that joined the Israelites in Canaan after escaping from Egypt. The supernatural aspects of these stories aren't even dealt with as fact; they could only possibly be the primitive embellishments (or fabrications) of primitive man.

              If your religious faith is so tenuous that you feel you must believe every scriptural story as the factual truth, then I think that displays nothing more than insecurity.

              replyreport
              1. profile image0
                Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Exactly.

                Thank you for the extra corroboration. :-)

                replyreport
              2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                My faith suffers not one ounce by my dismissal of an ark a magical garden a man walking on water or the parting of an ocean.  I'm not sure what "message" these stories are supposed to give to me but whatever it is is obviously non-essential to my faith.

                replyreport
                1. Druid Dude profile image61
                  Druid Dudeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Cosider this MB. Sure faith is knowledge.

                  replyreport
                2. livelonger profile image76
                  livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Mine neither. I think attribution of supernatural powers was important at a time when people were ignorant; they commanded some sort of celestial authority.

                  replyreport
              3. artblack01 profile image61
                artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                I Heard from Jewish Historians that the Exodus happened because a large band of Consignment workers who were also warriors demanded payment and basically were cheated out of their payment (or something of that nature) and left, the pharaoh, enraged followed them and a large battle ensued, the idea of the parting of the red sea is not literal but metaphorical.  According to them.

                replyreport
                1. Chris Neal profile image76
                  Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I do believe all of scripture but it is not because my faith is tenuous. Quite the contrary, I've found that those with the most tenuous faith tend to flap in the breeze as to what they believe.

                  The Red Sea does part! This is scientifically verified. In Genesis, where it talks about a mighty wind coming up and pushing back the sea, that actually does happen at at least one point in the sea, a shallow area where a sufficiently strong wind can stop the flow and allow  a part of the water to "part", exposing dry ground. This has been observed. It's very, very rare, but it happened in the last century.

                  replyreport
                  1. A Thousand Words profile image69
                    A Thousand Wordsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Spreading wide enough for an entire group of people to walk across it, though? But, more importantly, what does it matter if it's a natural occurring phenomenon? (not really the same caliber from your description) If God works outside of our concept of physics, then Him parting water is completely possible/plausible, and evidence of it kind of happening naturally would be irrelevant, anyway.

                    replyreport
            2. jacharless profile image74
              jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              None of which gives any justification to Torah being mis-written nor embellished  regarding the Hebrew people. If Torah, more precisely Tanakh, were solely a 'sacred' text or religious manual, then the claim could be considered. But anyone with a brain knows Torah (Tanakh) is not strictly a religious artifact or manual.
              And I have more than a hundred authentic, Israeli-born Hebrews to testify to it.

              So still, you appear to chase tail, in this area.
              The bible itself, is an entirely different story.

              James

              replyreport
              1. profile image0
                Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Another substanceless claim, this time corroborated by MORE than a HUNDRED  authentic Hebrews, who are actually Israeli-born! So far, you've managed at least two ad hominem attacks, an appeal to incredulity, and now an appeal to authority. Please, save us both time -- and be intellectually honest -- by sticking your fingers in your ears, and chanting, "I believe it because I believe it! Neener neener neener!"

                replyreport
                1. jacharless profile image74
                  jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually, what I believe might altogether cause you to pull the hair from your chin, rip your Wal*Mart robes and send the entire southern baptist-full gospel-knights-of-columbus mob out to sterilize me. lol.

                  Still, history is best known by its own people; not by people pretending to know another's history, via satellite, sound bite or mistranslated texts. I stand on my claim, can provide validity that Hebrew history has not been embellished; but that the Bible has been mistranslated purposefully, leaving out portions of Tanakh {which includes Torah} or Talmud -which is the Babylonian version and finally, that the "super-natural elements within Tanakh -as well as Zohar- can be substantiated. To validate it, though, one must do a Hume, but alas most Kant. lol.

                  So, where does that leave you. Hmm, let's see. Oh, yes, here it is. {had to dig out from the sofa cushion} You are precisely where you wanted to be, between the glass and the Gangsters of God. Still lovingly-loathing the game."

                  Don't you just love Fortuitous Cookies?

                  James.

                  replyreport
                  1. profile image0
                    Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    I promise, there is nothing that you could believe which would surprise me.

                    As for "proving" anything about the past, it can't be done. You, I -- and every historian -- have exactly the same access to the past, namely, none at all. You can establish a hierarchy of likelihood, but nothing more.  If you think you can "provide validity" to your claims, please do.

                    By the way, most Jews don't believe the miraculous bits of Tanakh, the Talmud, or the Zohar, and would never confuse the Babylonian Talmud as a "version" of the Torah or Tanakh.

                    replyreport
      2. artblack01 profile image61
        artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Funny thing about the "supernatural", around the time of the Vikings a solar eclipse was thought to be one of their god's eating the sun. They would scream at their god to give the sun back and do you know what happened? He gave it back of course... What kind of loving god would not give back the sun to his scared angry followers?

        replyreport
    9. Civil War Bob profile image61
      Civil War Bobposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I'm coming in a bit late on this one, but here goes.
      Yes. It is historically accurate.  Yes, the supernatural stuff happened.  Nay-sayers who believe in paranormal events today need to think through their overall view of the Bible...as the Pharisees had to think about Jesus' claims to being Messiah.
      Sadducee-type folks who don't like anything of the "supernatural" need to think about the accuracy of "facts" from their sources.
      Nightwork4:  Do you have faith (I choose that word intentionally) in The History Channel's accuracy?
      MelissaBarrett: The whole scientific community could just be wrong, not lying, as when "they" all believed the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth and that bleeding actually improved health and that disease was spread by bad air.
      EinderDarkwolf & Mark Knowles: Can you guys give me the title of any history book you consider 'accurate' based on your evidential standards?  As the writer of a Civil War history, I'd like to read it...honestly!
      Is today's date of May 8, 2012 Anno Domini (Year of Our Lord) historically accurate or should we check what Star Date it is, based on Captain Kirk's log?  smile

      replyreport
      1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
        MelissaBarrettposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Wrong about the existence of Dinosaur fossils?  Wrong about the size?  Wrong about the age?  Wrong about what exactly?

        replyreport
      2. profile image0
        Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I don't believe in paranormal events today.

        replyreport
      3. artblack01 profile image61
        artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The paranormal is for people who are ignorant for the causes of the natural worlds little bumps and shakes and refracted imagery. Optical illusions are not only easy to create but sometimes naturally occurring. Many people from now to the beginning of time suffer from schizophrenic hallucinations. Mental illness has not always been understood as such and I am sure many schizophrenics have been thought of as shaman or prophets or messiahs.

        replyreport
      4. artblack01 profile image61
        artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        With all the different religions out there, all the different gods, and all having the same amount of historical accuracy.... How can anyone look at the bible and not take it seriously?

        replyreport
    10. Kim Cantrell profile image60
      Kim Cantrellposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      No, I do not believe it is historically accurate but that is not to say I am not a believer in God.

      For several years I've been struggling with the teachings of my youth in the  Pentecostal church.  It's been a rough road and one my mother, whom I love dearly and truly admire her unbending faith (even if I don't necessarily agree), is disappointed in.

      Reading about the many, many religious beliefs from around the world, I've come to the conclusion there is three important things I must do in my life:  (1) Believe in a power greater than myself (I choose to call him God while others address "him" as something else which isn't wrong, in my opinion); (2) Be kind to others, treat them as I wish to be treated; and (3) Whatever I send out, good or bad, will return to me three fold - which some would say is wrapped up in number 2 but I treat it as a separate issue.

      I guess if I just to sum up what I feel about the Bible, I'd say it is a tool of manipulation to make people behave; just a step above fairy tales and old wives tales because there are some basics truths and real people involved.

      I may be wrong, whether Christians or to non-believers, and I'm willing to admit that.  But I have decided I have to live a way that feels right to MY conscience.

      replyreport
      1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Hi Kim, scripture may be misused by some as a tool to control, to instill fear, and to condemn others. It is the WORD of the LIVING Creator. When HE quickens HIS word to a person HE heals. I was indoctrinated with Roman Catholicism and it was bbbbbaaaaaddddd. I needed a lot of healing from the terror I was so bad and was surely going to hell. it was hell.

        Meditating on scriptures has healed me of all of the wounds caused by men claiming to be religious authorities misusing it.

        Father says, "I will never leave you nor forsake you." And you can bet your life that Father is there and HE will never leave you nor forsake you.

        It is also written. "He has made us accepted in the beloved." This one verse did  more to heal my wounds than many others. HE, the Creator of all things accepts me!

        There is now, no condemnation to them that are in Christ, who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit. Father calls us to seek to KNOW HIM. When we do, HE never, never, never condemns us. Even when we fail He does not condemn, unlike religiously influenced people.

        Father hates religion...but HIS word holds a lot of comfort...

        replyreport
      2. artblack01 profile image61
        artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I decided a long time ago to live by some basic rules: don't believe anything without evidence, never lie and always be kind and courteous to others. The only time I am not a nice person is whthesis wine is an unkind, lying, hateful, jerk.

        replyreport
    11. Doc Snow profile image83
      Doc Snowposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't see how the Bible can be historically accurate in all respects, insofar as it is not internally consistent.

      Compare, for instance, the first two books of Genesis:  you will find inconsistent accounts of Creation, in which specific creatures were created in different orders.

      Or take the four Gospels:  they give quite different accounts of the events surrounding the Resurrection.  It's possible to force them together into one narrative--but that narrative will read more like a British bedroom farce, with characters rushing on and off stage with split-second timing, than a solemn account of the central event of the New Testament.

      It's almost as if God was trying to keep us from taking his Scripture too literally.  Not surprising, since God was evidently a poet...

      :-)

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Actually, no, it is a quite believable account, not at all like a farce.

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          It's definitely a comedy.

          replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The original transcripts are accurate. all of the modern translations may well not be.

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Accurate in what way?

          replyreport
    12. profile image0
      SirDentposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes.

      replyreport
    13. ib radmasters profile image61
      ib radmastersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The Old Testament and the New Testament first off are not part I and part II of the Bible. They are too separate books, written by different people, at different times about different things. Trying to collate them is futile.

      The Old Testament, especially Genesis is so vague and ambiguous that it is worthless to even consider trying to tie it in with historical events.
      Historically, it would have happened less than ten thousand years ago, but science has proven the earth has been around for four and a half billion years.

      While there may be some correlation to historical events outside of the book of Genesis, like a flood, it would have already happened by the time the Old Testament was written. The Old Testament was not a contemporaneous written document. Anything in it was only the current knowledge at the time of its writing.

      It was written only hundreds of years from the time when the New Testament was starting to be written.

      The New Testament may have events in it that bear some historical correlation, but the proof of God is not one of them.

      So the answer is NO.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Actually, yes and no. The OT is generally considered to have been written over about 1000 years. It's about the history of Ancient Israel, but it is also about God's redemptive plan in that it has multiple prophecies. The events in the New Testament occur about 400 years after the end of the Old Testament, and are about how Jesus fulfilled those prophecies.



        But has science proved that Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations existed millions of years ago?



        Ironically, nobody is actually claiming that the Pentateuch (the five books written mostly by Moses) was contemporaneous for most of Genesis. That includes the stories of Adam and Eve, the Flood, and Jacob and Esau.



        I disagree.

        replyreport
        1. profile image0
          Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          I'm confused by this sentence. Were you being sarcastic?

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I'm two days behind on answering your question on a post that is now seven days old. I'm sorry, but I don't even remember what I was saying at that time.

            replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The New Testament is the fulfillment of the OLD. English can in no way accurately translate the original language of a nomadic people. ONE must come to KNOW the Spirit of the scriptures to believe it is the WORD of our Creator given to show us who He is---LOVE.  IF He is love then why? ah, that is the question

        Our good and loving Father gave implicit instructions to his first son, Adam. Do NOT play with matches, you will burn the house down

        what did Adam do?

        all of us are like ADAM, then we blame God when we hurt ourselves and hurt others

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          The new testament in no way accurately fulfills the old. The next question is irrelevant. There is no creator.
          I am obviously not like Adam in that I don't blame god when something bad happens to myself, I take responsibility for my actions and their outcomes, unless you mean I am god. And I never hurt others except in self defense.

          replyreport
    14. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
      ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The Bible is writing that is inspired by Ruach HaKodesh known by most today as the Holy Spirit. Like any writing or saying, it has been translated from its original language which is most likely Hebrew [which itself has morphed from its original form into what it is today], into many different languages and in the translation has lost a lot of original meaning. Most people read the scripture with a Greek mindset while it must be understood in the ancient Hebrews mindset. It is supernatural when the Spirit of the LIVING Ruach HaKodesh breathes life into it. Otherwise it is simply a dead letter.

      replyreport
      1. janesix profile image59
        janesixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I almost agree with that.

        replyreport
      2. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The Old Testament was Hebrew and we do need a Hebrew mindset when translating it, but the New Testament was written in Greek.

        replyreport
        1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
          ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          OH, but we DO need a Hebrew mindset to understand the Covenant of YHVH! That's the huge problem with Christianity and why there is so much confusion and misunderstanding. And the original fulfilled covenant, the Brit Hadesha or New Testament was written in Hebrew and copied or translated into Greek as well because many Jews had been assimilated into Greek culture.

          replyreport
        2. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Funny thing about Hebrew is that it doesn't quite translate directly into English. Not all languages can be. Example, how do you say your welcome in Spanish? De nada. If you didn't know the actual translation you'd say it translates into "of nothing".

          Same with ancient Hebrew. Some words are connected to phrases. Other words like Elohim, which is the words used for god is plural. Meaning the early Jews were probably polytheistic but somewhere along the way it changed. Much of jewish history has been deleted by war. Consider the nazis and their attempt to erase the Jews from existence. It wasn't just killing them but destroying all traces of their existence from history, burning books and such.

          I wonder if ever a group of people were successful in doing this before.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            The Jews did go through a polytheistic period, it's laid out in the Bible. In fact, it's one of the major reasons given for the diaspora.

            It's no secret that Hebrew doesn't translate well into English. But so many people from so many disciplines have worked so hard on it, that it seems fairly safe we have the best possible translations.

            replyreport
            1. artblack01 profile image61
              artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Oh?  Well, then, which one is "the best possible translation"?  I have yet to find one that I have read that correctly translates anything from the original texts.

              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Please understand that I am taking you at your word here. For you to make that statement means that you are an expert in Hebrew. Where can I read your writings?

                replyreport
      3. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
        EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Shalom Shalah,
           It's nice to see you in the forums. However, I do feel the need to educate with you unfortunately. This is not to go against you beliefs, so please don't take it that way, this is just a quick education in the Holy Spirit and when it became available to man.

        Ruach HaKodesh, also known as the holy spirit, is believed to be the possessing spirit of God. From time to time it can take people and cause them to perform "miracles" as well as many other great feats. Sometimes it allows them to see into the future and it is believed that it was involved with writing the bible. Something we can agree that pretty much everyone knows, yes?

        Moving into the Bible, the Holy Spirit did not come to men until after the death and resurrection of Jesus, at which point Jesus himself released the Holy Spirit unto them. Which leads me to point out that the New Testament, in whole or in part, could be the only part of the Bible that could inspired by the Holy Spirit. The beginning books would not have been, as men were marked as unclean and unfit for the Holy Spirit. This does include those like Moses who spent more than 55 years in the Egyptian faith and beliefs.

        This is not to try and detract from what your saying, am just pointing out something that seems to be skipped over quite a bit.

        replyreport
    15. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
      ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Absolutely and I expect to be seeing more supernatural events healings, deliverances, translations from one place to another, people crippled by disease being made whole. BUT that is NOT what faith is based on. Faith is based on believing the WORD because Ruach HaMashiach causes the WORD to witness with one's spirit.

      replyreport
      1. profile image0
        Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Are you a "Messianic Jew," by any chance?

        replyreport
    16. parrster profile image88
      parrsterposted 12 years agoin reply to this
      replyreport
      1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Thank you thank you thank you YVHV. YOU are soo good to bring more and more truth and revelation to the hungry thirsty

        soul
        Thanks parrster

        replyreport
      2. profile image0
        Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I'm not disputing the historicity of the Bible.

        replyreport
    17. John Sarkis profile image85
      John Sarkisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I've heard that some historians have had a difficult time getting dates correct.  Some people say The Bible is approximately 3300 years old (as old as Moses, since he wrote the first 5 books), and other have said it's less than 2500 years old and put together around the time of Daniel...hard so say, but to makes no difference to a believer, because, faith is all that really matters

      replyreport
      1. artblack01 profile image61
        artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Faith is the stupid affirmation of the absurd. You can have faith in anything but wouldn't you rather believe in what is true?

        replyreport
    18. profile image0
      AKA Winstonposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Of course!  It is the word of god, and thus, it must be infallible, no?  The trouble is that history is not Biblically accurate.

      See, it all depends upon where one places the cart in relationship to the horse.

      replyreport
      1. jacharless profile image74
        jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        @#%&!$ cart. lol

        replyreport
      2. Paul Wingert profile image59
        Paul Wingertposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        That's too funny! "The trouble is that history is not Biblically accurate." ROTFL!!!!!

        replyreport
      3. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        It's not untestable, you know. There were many prophecies in it that can be looked at.

        replyreport
    19. Don W profile image80
      Don Wposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "Is the Bible historically accurate?"

      In some parts perhaps. In other parts, not so much.

      replyreport
  2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years ago

    More like hysterically inaccurate...

    replyreport
    1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
      ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Many of the translations ARE inaccurate. YOU are correct.

      replyreport
  3. Felixedet2000 profile image59
    Felixedet2000posted 12 years ago

    The Bible is Historically very accurate there is no doubt about that fact.

    replyreport
    1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      On what planet and in what dimension? There are people and some places that existed in the Bible, but that doesn't make it historically accurate by any means.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Either it is or it isn't. Even if a few events are not historical (and I know I don't have to tell you where I stand on that!) it would still be overwhelmingly accurate.

        replyreport
        1. janesix profile image59
          janesixposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Overwhelmingly something, but not accurate.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, accurate.

            replyreport
            1. Cagsil profile image70
              Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              lol

              replyreport
        2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
          EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Existence of historical figures are only that, existence of historical figures. Choosing to say it's a historical fact, with all other historians completely contradicting it, does not qualify it as fact, only as having historical figures and places.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Did I miss something? When in the last two months did "all other historians" begin contradicting everything but the existence of a handful of historical figures?

            replyreport
            1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Every historian from the time of Jesus, doesn't record a Jesus or a Messiah, or anything even remotely related to the bible. Herod and Pilany are both recorded, but Jesus and his "miracles" and such, do not exist. I've conceded before that such records may have been stolen and there by lost, but if that is the case, they should still exist somewhere. We just haven't found them. If that's the case, until we find them, the bible remains unsubstantiated as a 100% accurate historical record.

              replyreport
              1. Josak profile image60
                Josakposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Not to mention things like the exodus, mentioned nowhere else and the Israeli Archaeological team that searched for evidence for decades having come forth and said they can find absolutely no evidence of it though evidence should exist.

                replyreport
                1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
                  EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Adding to that there is an entire team of scholars who's found a ton of inconsistencies and mistranslations in the bible. So many in fact, that it would take over 200 years for them to sort them all out..They started with Genesis and it's taken them 10 years just to get through the first chapter. Interesting thing that is.

                  replyreport
                  1. profile image0
                    Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Not that I'm doubting your claim, but a link documenting your "entire team of scholars" would be a good idea.

                    replyreport
                  2. Chris Neal profile image76
                    Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Interesting indeed. Where can I find this research?

                    replyreport
              2. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                So the fact that there were no refutations of Jesus' existence or miracles from congtemporaneous sources is proof that He didn't exist? The Talmud talked about Jesus. And the four Gospels were written within the lifetimes of people who would know if those things weren't true. They didn't just have Jesus doing things in backwaters burgs, they had Him in Jerusalem at Passover!

                replyreport
                1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
                  EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  The four Gospels are "supposedly" written within the lifetime's of the authors. The earliest manuscripts we have don't come until around 200 C.E though. There's no way for us to tell if the "supposed" authors of these works ever existed to begin with.

                  As for the refutations, I give you that they don't exist, but there is nothing corroborating it either. These stories just kinda sprung up and then began to be claimed as facts. The Torah, which includes the Talmud, speaks of many things. I'm sure the Israelites and the Jewish community of that time believed that their God created them and them alone as well, since that's the only group of people the bible speaks of actually creating.

                  replyreport
                  1. Chris Neal profile image76
                    Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    Most of the Church Fathers knew or knew someone who knew John or Paul or one of the other Apostles. That doesn't mean they "knew someone who knew someone who knew someone," that means the relationships were two generations max, and they quoted and named names. In order to support your contention, we would have to consign such a large portion of general history to 'unreliable' that I would no long be able to verify the "supposed" Einderdarkwolf is actually communicating with me.



                    Either you're not making sense or I'm misreading you. Of course the Jews thought God created everybody, the Bible even talks about other groups. And that everybody is descended from Adam and Eve.

                    replyreport
                  2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
                    ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                    The manuscripts may have been copies of texts written by the original authors. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, these letters would have been written down for study among the believers of the day. They had to be accurately copied at that time. Unless the Spirit of Truth witnesses with your spirit  you won't get it, because it is spiritually known. AND you won't get it especially if you simply REFUSE to get it.

                    LOOK up both The Case for Christ, by Lee Stroebel, and especially C.S Lewis, Surprised by Joy, and More Than a Carpenter and New Evidence That Demands a verdict by Josh McDowell.  all of these men refused to believe  until

                    replyreport
        3. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Harry potter is historically accurate. So are many fictional stories.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So where can I go find Hogwarts? Are you a mud-blood?

            replyreport
            1. artblack01 profile image61
              artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

              You tell me where I can find the remains of the tower of Babel and the resting place of the Ark and I will tell you where Hogwarts is.

              replyreport
              1. Paul Wingert profile image59
                Paul Wingertposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                I'll tell you where the resting place of the arc and Eden is at. In your mind. Your imagination is limitless.

                replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        The original scripture is historically accurate. Many of the translations we have today probably have lost that historical accurateness.

        replyreport
      3. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Were you abused by a religious authority figure?

        replyreport
    2. Mark Knowles profile image58
      Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      lol

      replyreport
      1. artblack01 profile image61
        artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Hey mark, I would like to point out that you are the mirror version of vector7. Not looking to hurt your feelings, just thought you should be aware of this observation.

        replyreport
        1. Mark Knowles profile image58
          Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          You think I don't know that? In any case - it rather depends to whom I am speaking. This is how it works:

          1. Christians claim that "they are doing unto others as they would have done unto themselves."
          2. I do unto them as they do unto others.
          3. They don't like being spoken to as though they are a naughty 3 year old child being chastised by an over bearing adult stranger.

          big_smile

          I have actual facts to back me us as well - plus I do not hide behind a fake identity as many of these do. To be a better mirror - I should really start a sock puppet account and hide.

          replyreport
          1. artblack01 profile image61
            artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Good point.

            replyreport
    3. ib radmasters profile image61
      ib radmastersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      There is only doubt, where can you possibly get any other conclusion.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Archeology. Some parts of it you do have to take on faith, but other parts of it have been verified archeologically.

        So there is not "only doubt."

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          "Some parts of it you do have to take on faith"
          The only thing that Archeology says is that the human Authors of the Bible existed and they based their mythology on things they believed caused the things they did not understand from nature.  I mean the Bible didn't come out of thin air from some sort of deity.  People wrote it, but that still doesn't make it historically accurate it makes it a historical artifact that has been bastardized by modern peoples.

          replyreport
          1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
            ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I wholeheartedly agree with you artb about the scriptures having been 'bastardized' what amazing insight! That's the perfect word!

            Through all of its translations from ancient Hebrew into Greek though the Greek was pretty close because it was translated by Hebrew scholars for Jews that were assimilated into Greek Hellenism to understand.

            Now unless one also has the illumination of the Spirit or [Ruach HaKodesh] it becomes only a dead letter.

            and that it the problem!

            Many that are trying to follow Jesus do not know Him, but have only a 'law' made for the rebellious and disobedient for whom it was given to teach them the difference between - really life and death.

            After 400 years of slavery in Egypt and having been sort of inculcated into Egyptian society the Israelites had adopted much of the base behavior of the Egyptians so they needed teaching and instruction from this God that led them out of enslavement to building Egypt's monuments and cities.

            He promised HE would take care of them IF they followed His rules much like so many parents say, As long as you live under my roof, you'll respect me and follow my rules.

            is that not fair in exchange for being taken care of?

            Apart from the illumination of Ruach HaKodesh one cannot see the Father's loving care in His teachings and instructions.

            It appears restrictive and to deprive man of natural pleasures that he created for us to enjoy. But in truth it doesn't!

            He just wants us to enjoy those things in a certain context not merely wantonly which despoils their true specialness and worth.

            There's way more to it than that as well.

            One has to learn the Hebrew mind to really understand the WORD. Yeshua was/is Hebrew. Hebrew means to 'cross from death - or deadness in trespasses against His 'law' into life' Life is in the Spirit--not merely in the flesh, emotions, intellect and will.

            You are right about the bible being 'bastardized' though. Excellent conclusion. Unlearned men mis-use it for their own purposes and also a religious spirit causes innocent followers of Christ to mis-use the sword to hurt instead of rightly dividing it for true healing and good.

            been there, done that and I am sorry i did it.

            replyreport
            1. Chris Neal profile image76
              Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              I don't agree with everything you said but I do agree with the gist of it. The illumination of the Holy Spirit is indeed fundamental and necessary, and I thank God for it!

              replyreport
          2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
            ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"
            is how this has been translated.

            Faith is substance. It is not merely a mythological idea.
            Faith is the Person of Yeshua revealing Himself to people by His Spirit Ruach HaKodesh

            without that, the Bible is simply a 'dead' letter. Ruach HaKodesh quickens the person that hears Him or makes that person 'alive' from the deadness of their transgressions or missing the mark.

            Faith comes by hearing [hearing is revelation of the Spirit of the Book] and hearing by the WORD of Yeshua [Salvation now].

            It's the spirit 'in' which any person quotes scripture from that either brings life or 'death'.

            Many of Yeshua's chosen are being trained to hear His voice and to correctly handle the WORD of LIFE in such a manner as to bring life and not condemnation and death or to just beat others over the head with.

            Every person speaks from his or her own worldview. That is all that any of us have. Communication and dialogue is necessary to come to some sort of agreement or to choose to agree to disagree.

            Most people will be defensive if they feel attacked and fight back.
            Many that have come to believe in Yeshua are not trying to attack others at all! They simply are trying to share what to them is a great experience of having had a life changing experience.

            The scripture can not be understood apart from the quickening and illumination of Ruach HaKodesh.

            It was written down as a history of a people the Creator interacted with, called out of the surrounding nations to be different, to sanctify themselves and to lift the soul and body to a higher purpose than simple appetite fulfillment.

            I recently read where a Rabbi said, "YHVH said to the animals, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, let us make them mala and female." This would explain the 'us' He was talking to.

            It would also explain why man acts so much like an animal sometimes. Having been through so much religious indoctrination in my life I'm not sure how I feel about that statement. But his being a Rabbi from a Jewish tradition and background and their having so much oral history passed from generation to generation--it could be so...

            Man needs the breath of the Spirit to lift him from 'anime' alone to wise, kind, gentle, understanding and really respectful of all others.

            YHVH does not think in terms of right vs wrong, [the tree of the knowledge of good and evil] but in terms of relationship with us.

            The Decalogue was not to use to condemn man, but to reveal what would cause him to harm himself and/or others! Like a truly good Father teaching his children fire will burn you, a sharp knife not handled correctly will cut you and make you bleed [what a lot of unskilled believers do/been there, done that, still prone to fall into it if i let my emotions get the better of me], this is how you handle a gun safely.

            Father did not forbid fornication, adultery, stealing [which by the way goes so much deeper than taking a material object from someone; it includes stealing their sense of worth with belittling remarks and put downs], lying, defaming another to deprive man of anything as the serpent suggested and continues to suggest today.

            Pleasure for pleasure's sake is devoid of its true purpose of really enjoying the gift Father gave to know another in a most intimate way and to join two spirits with His in a three-fold cord that would not be easily broken this causing the emotional devastation of trying this partner and that and leaving little pieces of self with each pulling you in all kinds of directions and in great confusion not knowing how incredibly special, unique and truly valued you are....

            Sex for pleasures sake feels good to be sure. That is, however, only the senses experiencing sensations that feel good and create a 'drug' high of sorts in the brain and the physiological makeup that then cause withdrawals like a drug.. HIS purpose? I think not

            He created it for the utmost pleasure in joining man and woman, ie Adam and Eve in one becoming enthralled with each other and the gift of His Spirit singing through their spirits in harmony and accord with each other never to be torn apart and leave brokenness.

            When anyone takes the 'letter of the law' and judges others with it, they judge every sin they themselves commit also and, as we see, have others pointing to their flaws and faults....hence the defensive fighting and bickering and pointing fingers at each other   been there, done that hate it

            will i fall into it again? maybe, but i pray not with all my heart and soul

            YHVH never deprives us of His good gifts, but has given instruction and teaching and all good things for us to enjoy

            we defile them and corrupt their purpose and then viciously defend our own missing the mark because the pleasure or the false sense of 'superiority' means more to us than the sacredness of one another

            replyreport
  4. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    The greatest reality about the Bible is that it is here in these modern days still telling it's story to the whole world. Most published  and most translated book on earth.  And by the way the cheapest and even freely available to any you so choose. Yes..it is a banned book in some places because the Truth interferes with the doubts many prefer to have.  It has survived wars and even the nation used to write it and the majority of it's national citizens refused to accept it. They may have stumbled but the Word did not. Now I know why it is called the Living Word.  No other book even comes close to giving "history " of  Man and details such ancient nations with accuracy as arcrheologist are finding out.  Sure there are skeptics and always will be but to even have the account before us to even examine is a marvel we often fail to consider.  To me it is clear, there is already enough accuracy in it that far exceeds anything else in the world and for me that is good enough!! The point is God didn't have to inspire anyone and I wonder what kind of Man would we be without His biblical anchor giving us a history for starter's.

    replyreport
    1. ib radmasters profile image61
      ib radmastersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      That same story is irrelevant today, and there has been no new stories in two thousand years. The writings of Shakespeare are more relevant today than the bibles, because it relates to human nature which never changes.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Ever read the Bible? There's an awful lot about human nature in there.

        The reason there have been no "new stories for 2000 years" is because Jesus already is in Heaven, and we wait for Him to come back. We know the story of the early church, and in fact we have the history of the Christian church.

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          We also have the history of harry potter, it has been fulfilled!

          replyreport
    2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
      ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      AMEN! very well said.

      replyreport
  5. jacharless profile image74
    jacharlessposted 12 years ago

    The only thing I would attest to science being possibly wrong about is the age of fossils, simply because only one method is being used to measure the age of such objects. That measure could very well be inaccurate. And, of course the relative measure equally inaccurate.

    Even still, given the outline of creation in Torah, it seems to fit well. In actuality, man did not show up on the scene until the very END of the "sixth span". That Span would include dinosaurs. Who knows how long that "Span/Day" was?

    No one in the right mind would believe the entire planet and everything on it came into manifestation in 24 hours. Heck, even farmers know it takes 28 days to germinate any seed.

    James.

    replyreport
    1. ib radmasters profile image61
      ib radmastersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It is days, not span. light and dark defined days, not spans.

      replyreport
      1. jacharless profile image74
        jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I disagree.

        day 1: light comes; no definitive of "days".
        day 2: atmosphere formed
        day 3: planet formed, as seas, oceans, plants, seed baring plants.
        day 4: DAYS {plural} are created; to mark the seasons, sun/stars & moon.

        That means, days {plural} are different from Day 1, Day 2, etc.

        day 5: fish, birds
        day 6a: cattle, bugs, land animals
        day 6b: humanity -special notation of trees baring fruit & herbs for humans...
        day 7: Sabat with humanity

        The "time" or multitude of "lesser days" is highly noted as existing through Days 4, 5 and 6. Each Day represents a "span" of when these actions occurred.

        Even if one considers the notion of the singular mention of 1,000 "years" is one Day, it simply makes sense that there is larger span at work. 1,000 years is equal to 365,000 days or one Day. So, 6,000 "years" is equal to 2,190,000 "days" -or sunsets/sunrises. That actually makes a little more sense, rather than a single 24 hour period to form the entire planet, animals, their habitats, natural pests, fruit, balances of breathable air levels etc.

        Creator has not changed how He applies the Universal Principle.

        James.

        replyreport
        1. ib radmasters profile image61
          ib radmastersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Genesis Chapter 1: The Creation of Light
          The Creation of Light
          Genesis 1

          1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

          2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

          3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

          4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

          5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

          6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

          7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

          8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

          replyreport
    2. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Only one method is used to date fossils? To which method are you referring? Radiocarbon? Potassium-argon? Uranium-lead? Rubidium-strontium? Fission track? Chlorine-36? Isochron?

      And those are only some of the radiometric dating techniques.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Serious question, how different, if at all, are the dates given by the different methods? I honestly didn't know about all of them, like most people I only really knew about radio-carbon. Is that the method of choice? Is it considered the most reliable? Do the other methods get used very often?

        replyreport
        1. profile image0
          scottcgruberposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Different dating techniques are used for different situations. Radiocarbon dating is only valid for organic materials under 50,000 years old - it cannot be used to date a 60 million year old rock. Potassium-Argon dating, on the other hand, is effective on old rocks, since K-40 has a half life of 1.25 billion years. However, Argon is a light gas that can escape from porous rocks, so a method using heavy elements, like Uranium-Lead or Rubidium-Strontium dating is better for more pourous rocks.

          When geologists are trying to determine the age of a lava flow or other rock formation, they commonly will use multiple methods, averaging the results to get a more accurate date.

          I'm working on a hub on this very topic right now, in fact. Hope to have it published in the next few days.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you!

            replyreport
  6. winvest2311 profile image54
    winvest2311posted 12 years ago

    Until you have felt the power of the Holy Spirit personally working in your life there is no point in arguing about it.
    There are thousands of scientists who now believe in creation rather than Evolutionary theory !

    replyreport
    1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't invoke spirits, sorry.

      I'm not surprised that many might have turned to the creation theory. The question is, which creation theory did they turn to? There are more creation theories than there are religions which support them after all.

      replyreport
    2. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      roll

      replyreport
    3. Paul Wingert profile image59
      Paul Wingertposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "There are thousands of scientists who now believe in creation rather than Evolutionary theory !"

      Yeah I'm sure they are! Stephan Hawkin is leading the pack, right? LOL
      Get real!

      replyreport
  7. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    Who would care to tell us about creation unless it was done by the source. Man thought the world was flat. Man said the sun goes up and it goes down but in reality it goes nowhere....it's the Earth which turns and so we have day and night and how long did it take Man to figure that out! We are so brilliant when we use 20/20 vision.  God is the creator of evolution as well.  I know that He is because I have heard His Voice after searching deeply into the word of scripture.  I have my own experience.

    replyreport
    1. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Seek help then. If you heard any other voice other than that of your conscience, please seriously seek medical attention.

      Not trying to offend, but seriously. It could be a sign of a more pressing medical problem, which you're falsely attributing to what you hope is a G/god.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        It might also be a sign of God talking to someone.

        Saying you "hear God's voice" is not always a literal statement. I've said often that I've heard from God and almost as often that I've never "heard voices."

        replyreport
    2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Using what the Church said about the world vs what was said about the world before the church existed and before Jesus was even supposedly born, yea, I guess we know what the truth actually is vs what christians postulate it as being!

      replyreport
      1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        John recorded that Yeshua said, "If you continue in My Word you shall KNOW the truth and the truth shall set you free." Free from what? Doubt about HIS reality and doubt about HIS communicating to you SPIRIT to spirit. He also said, "IF you follow My instructions, I and My Father will manifest the reality of who I am to you." Many of us have continued in the TRUTH and found HIM to be real. Sometimes we do mistake and attribute thoughts that are not from Him to Him, but soon enough HE lets us know it was not HIM.

        replyreport
  8. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    Thank you for your concern but I am doing just fine.  What goes around is coming around...First the Jew...Then the Gentile and it comes down to the "fairness" principle otherwise known as God's righteousness.  Jesus stood in the midst of Israel and they failed to see Him for who he was.  Now Israel is back as a nation in 1948 and the Gentile world is failing to see the purpose He used Israel for thinking them even to be a myth.  Why is national Israel back after almost 2000 years of nonexistence?  The Bible makes reference to such a phenomenon to occur but the wisdom is to seek why? History will give you the answer to our tomorrows.  Doubt will blind and lead those to the Valley of Jehosaphat where Armageddon declares reality will check in upon the Earth whether you believe it or not and such is the prophetic word of God.

    replyreport
  9. Druid Dude profile image61
    Druid Dudeposted 12 years ago

    Truth remains truth no matter how deeply it is buried, The Bible (O.T.) is a collection of records, evidence not necessarily beneficial to the Jews or even the Israelites. I think there is more to Moses than some think, otherwise, he would have been against Egyptian iconography, and this same iconography extends into the  N.T. Something else. When Ramses attacked the Hittites, the entire area known as Palestine, was claimed by Egypt. Odd that in forty some years time, the Israelites would choose to live there. Still investigating this. Moses sure seems to have been a student of Akenaton. That would explain the monotheism.

    replyreport
    1. Chris Neal profile image76
      Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How so? The fact that they both practiced monotheism (sort of, in Akhenaton's case) doesn't mean that Moses strictly took from him.

      replyreport
  10. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    Amazing how the Jews are the only people who has a story to tell of so long ago that's actually intended for all people of the earth to read. What other people have performed such a work be it unknown even to them it's greater purpose.  It actually is a book which shows their frailty which is ours as well.  The only difference is their's are fully exposed for debate.  the Bible is rock solid because it is the TRUTH and nothing else comes close to it. It is the most objective book ever recorded because the very people writing it are rejected by it's own citizens. Such is the case with Jesus. The Word continues forward despite unbelief.  Indeed it is marvelous how such is the power of God under demonstration generation after generation even now.  All of this so that even you and I can know that He is and always will be!

    replyreport
    1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The Sumerian religion and Gods extend back to before the Torah was ever assembled and is meant for all people, for all time, located everywhere in the world. All your doing is trying to make an excuse as to why one is more real that others, when in fact, it's among the youngest there is.

      replyreport
      1. jacharless profile image74
        jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I agree, there were many religions prior to organized Judaism.
        It is actually well noted that Abram was from a pagan family, and Enoch's writing extend this by the hierarchy of Ba`al practices.

        While I do not support Greg's notion of the Bible being the word of God, he does establish a point. It is perhaps one of the only historical accounts to still be a focal point of modern society {six thousand years and counting}, despite many attempts to wipe this particular culture off the map -for good. An account that combines fault with success, science with theology, reason with philosophy, medicine with technology, humanism with ambition, tragedy with romance, war with peace, law with grace, poetry, music, genealogy and more. To that end, there is really nothing like it.

        James

        replyreport
        1. Chris Neal profile image76
          Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Point well made. The Sumerian religion, in fact most religions were meant to establish rules, and be "for all people for all time." But few have had the staying power in just sheer historical terms that the Jewish Bible has had.

          replyreport
          1. Mark Knowles profile image58
            Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            There certainly is something to be said for killing anyone that does not agree to follow your religion. Talk about great marketing.

            Fortunately now we know it is all lies and BS, and you are no longer able to murder the opposition - we are dispensing with it.

            replyreport
          2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
            EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            The others also didn't murder countless millions for not agreeing with their Religion. There's a difference between staying power, and killing the competition.

            replyreport
            1. Chris Neal profile image76
              Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              No, they just murdered people for fun.

              If you're problem with Christianity is that people were slaughtered, then all well and good. If your problem with Christianity is that it doesn't take the gnostic philosophers into account, then so be it. But is it that it goes too far or not far enough?

              Also, and I've said this often enough that I'm sure that many people, including (and I don't usually like to name names, but I think it's called for in this case) A Troubled Man, Randy Godwin, Rad Man and probably even Mark Knowles (if he can calm down long enough) can quote me saying, "I've never shrunk from history." And oddly enough, Christianity wasn't any more successful in "wiping out the competition" than other religions were in wiping it out when it was the competition!

              And since we're bringing up history, what about when people were slaughtering Christians? What about when Christianity was the force that preserved knowledge while the illiterate, pagan German tribes were sacking Rome and destroying everything they could get their hands on? No, it doesn't change what peope did in the name of Jesus, and they will have to answer to God for those things, but if you're going to quote history, quote all of history, not just the selected parts that bolster one view.

              replyreport
              1. Mark Knowles profile image58
                Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Your ignorance of history is quite shocking actually. Do you make it up yourself - or is there some special Christian versions of history books that I am not aware of?

                Think you can calm down long enough to answer honestly - or will you need to make up some more lies to defend your beliefs?

                replyreport
              2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
                EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                And the purposeful burning of the biggest library the world had ever known, which contained more history then we even have no on the face of this planet? That was Just for fun as well, right? No need to leave it be when trying to make themselves historically accurate or anything.



                My problem is that it went to far. You can't claim human life as being sacred when your religion is responsible for more deaths then anything else in history. I don't just have a problem with Christianity over this either, I have a problem with all the religion that are like this. Including the Modern Muslims who think it's ok to kill people.



                Chris, believe it or not, Christian were successful in wiping out the competition. They completely destroyed the Druids and left a bad mark on them permenately in the process. They also completely wiped Gnostics, even though they are considered to still be around today, they aren't. Without anyone to hand things down, the competition dies. They wiped out witchcraft with the blood of kids and innocent women alike. Which is reported by more than one priest, bishop, cardinal, father or whatever else you want to call them.



                What about the wars the Christians fell into when they started claiming Jewish history? What about the fact that Jews were amongst those killing early Christians? I know all of the history, and I don't quote it to bolster one view, I quote it to drive a point home. Everyone currently practicing Christianity and clinging to it, are guilty of the same crimes just by association. Yet Christians tend to purposefully overlook these things, neither taking credit or denying that it happened. Treating it like it never happened doesn't change that it did. Your quick to try and defend the act, which is fine if you want to, but don't quote everything that happened before, by other groups, suddenly making it ok to go out and find people to make extinct. It doesn't work that way.

                replyreport
                1. Chris Neal profile image76
                  Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Did I or did I not say that I don't shrink from history? Did I deny the Inquisition? No! I've said often that many horrible things have been done by people who claim Jesus' name. But it's not the whole story. And you're saying you "don't quote it to bolster one view" is contradicted by your selective quotations in order to "drive home the point" that  all Christians are guilty by association because of past injustices! It's a neat trick, because now all abolitionists are guilty of slavery, all teetotallers are guilty of drunkenness, all pacifists are guilty of warmongering and wanton slaughter! If you're going to accuse me of things, at least accuse me of things I'm actually guilty of!

                  replyreport
              3. twosheds1 profile image60
                twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

                "Slaughtering" Christians? What specific events are you referring to? The Romans didn't attempt genocide at Christians, despite a few being thrown to the lions. Christianity was, and continues to be, very good at wiping out the competition. Just ask the Native Americans. And the Jews.

                replyreport
                1. Chris Neal profile image76
                  Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Have you read what I said to EinderDarkwolf a day or two ago?

                  replyreport
            2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
              ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Yeshua NEVER came to establish a religious system, but to re-establish the garden of Eden.

              replyreport
              1. Chris Neal profile image76
                Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                I've never heard that one before. Where do you get it?

                replyreport
                1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
                  ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Passion for Truth website. Simchat Torah Beit Midrash torah.tv website actually Rabbi Messer's teachings. House of David website Rabbi Curt Landry's teaching. These men have all come out of organized religion and into understanding of TORAH. Jeff A. Benner just search his name and his website will come up in the search. It is all about understanding the Hebrew mindset to understand the God who interacted with the People of the BOOK.  Messiah is a KING, not a religious leader.

                  replyreport
    2. livelonger profile image76
      livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      No, not really. Torah is for Jews; we're not concerned with the beliefs of others, much less expecting any sort of Biblical belief among Gentiles. In fact, we tend not to be really concerned with belief among Jews either (behavior is another matter entirely).

      replyreport
      1. gregb4hope profile image71
        gregb4hopeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Who cares about belief? Nobody but God!!  And from His point of view it's an option not a mandate.  A man name Jesus never had to die for the sins of the world but......He did. For two reasons 1) God doesn't bend the rules so he did what you and I could never do remain sinless not according to your standard but God's.... and the reward is be where He is when this life is over.   2) Now we have no excuse for not knowing hence God can bring creation to it's end and can say I told you so and be right on every count. And the risk is be somewhere else where He is not.  Forgive me for not using fancy scripture but I assure you these concepts are in scripture.

        I await the Sumerian gods as you suggest. Where is their power under demonstration that they might secure a hope? Where is their leader who would die for the betterment of man...all men? And how many gods do they need to get the job done? Polytheism existed in all it's many fables for mythology if full of them....what a joke and you believe that  "Darkwolf".  Monotheism existed first please see Abel and Cain worship before a singular God. How sad.....what reward do you get for your belief in Sumerian religion? The Egyptians have their Pharoahs who hope to go somewhere and went nowhere and still lay in their tombs. I'll take the empty tomb of Jesus any day with details of it fully available for my own opportunity to study in my house. 

        Sometimes you just have to look at the competition and consider the objective nature of the events and even the dare to be supernatural.  All which the Bible is in a class by itself for what history would men have without it.  Picture's on the wall  and a few proud ancient  kings words hanging in the museums. Now the shoe is on the other foot and time is short..... Israel is back and the word of God is moving forward once again and the conclusion is already written.  Prophecy is alive and well ...the idea and the word " Armageddon" comes from the Bible and so does the nation Israel. Remember this, only Israel was tested concerning belief of Jesus as Son of God...is that fair? The true and righteous God must balance the scales and if history hasn't taught us that then we haven't learned from it and that will be modern man biggest error before God. 

        This is what scripture declares by Isaiah the prophet called to write it down by God in Ch 46:9-11: I am God, and there is no other, I am God and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning and from the ancient times things that are not yet done saying 'My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure...indeed I have spoken it and I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it and I will also do it!" 

        I don't expect any one to be shaking in their boots...just took the time to care which is a by product of faith in Jesus. I see something on the horizon and may you be blessed...

        replyreport
        1. livelonger profile image76
          livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Thanks for the sermon, as a Jew I don't agree with most of what you've written here. If your faith in Jesus makes you a better person, then more power to you, though.

          replyreport
          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Are Christians better people for borrowing the Jewish OT to explain their history?

            replyreport
            1. livelonger profile image76
              livelongerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              No, not at all. I personally don't think matters like that are meaningful whatsoever. The Orthodox, on the other hand...

              replyreport
        2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
          EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Even though I have come to realize all your here to do Greg, is fight and argue, and not listen, understand, or anything else, I will do what I can to answer your questions, since you obviously can't do that for others.



          So your God is needy then? He needs people to believe in him, he needs people to love him? Sounds like he's extremely needy. Wait it's an option? Then where is his love when you choose not to believe? Again, extremely one sided. God doesn't bend the rules? Then why did he prove that man could live without sin using Jesus? Why did he continually bend the rules and interfere in the lives of certain men and women? If we are unable to remain sinless, then the entire point is moot because Jesus died for nothing, we will all sin, we will all continue to sin no matter what, and therefore there will not be one person allowed to be near God, or do you not realize the contradiction you yourself are purposing here? We have no excuse for not knowing what exactly? That a comic book type super-being exists? We have no proof that he does. You work with an assumption that he does. I work without the assumption that he does, but that I can do the right thing anyway.



          Try reading their histories and perhaps you might find out. I'm not a school teacher to teach you Religion 101. Have you ever stopped to think about why your God and "his" people had to go about attempting to wipe out all other religions from the face of the world? I assure it wasn't just because he was a jealous God! The only way to establish dominance is to wipe out the competition. Something the Church almost had perfected with over 1,000 years practice. Yet and still, they failed. As for you challenge of a demonstration of power, I put the same to you. Where is the demonstration of the power of your secular God? To this day no one has seen it. We have seen nothing of him or his power anywhere, we only see excuses made by men for what they themselves could not fathom. Where is the leader of the Christians who would die for the betterment of man...all men? They don't have one, they never have, your just assume such from a myth that was passed down until it was believed to be something that actually happened, much like the Greeks. As for how many Gods, remember that your faith is based around 3 SEPARATE entities. Other religions aren't the only polytheistic ones, no matter how many times you try to convince yourself otherwise. The story of Cain and Abel doesn't hold water here, or perhaps you've missed that. Monotheism isn't what you, or any other christian practice, no matter how much wish it to be so. You worship God, Jesus, and a Holy Spirit, which are defined, even in your holy text, as 3 different entities. Perhaps you need read Genesis again though so that you can realize that your God creates 2 sets of human beings, yet only goes into detail about one.

          First, you would have to establish that the aforementioned tomb actually belonged to Jesus, and that if it did, the Body was not moved etc. But of course, you can't do that without resorting to the Bible which makes the entire point, again, moot. The Pharaoh's, for all of your putting them down, didn't believe in a physical after life, just as the Bible never talks about one. Instead it talks about a spiritual one just as the pharaohs believe. I guess that is a little too much for you to understand however.



          Men have tons of history without it, we had tons more until the Christian community decided to break the tablets and put everything on paper to fire. Of course though, that fact eludes you as it does many. You wish to argue history, but you do not wish to study. Mores the pity to you. As for considering things objectively, it's overpoweringly clear that you are unable, and perhaps unfit, to be able to do so. As to the Bible being in a class all by itself, it's far from so. It falls in line with many other things, that came a very long time before it, most especially the new testament. When you look at such things Objectively, you can see it.

          People keep saying Israel is back, what does that mean? I've known about Israel since I was a little kid. Everyone I knew, knew about them. Every history book that I've read dealing with middle eastern countries, talks about it. So where did it go? When did it disappear? Why are you on about it being back when it was never gone?

          Scripture quoting to me is pointless, and you can read my other posts over the forums to find out why. As for Armageddon, I think you need to actually start doing some research to find out where that word first appeared before you make outrageous claims. Or perhaps your one of those who doesn't use the internet for research and can't go to the library and get a book.



          I wasn't planning on doing any shaking any time soon so it's good of you not to expect it. Caring isn't a by product of faith in Jesus. I have no faith in a mythical god-man, but I do care. I've seen many things on the horizon, but in the end, things always determine themselves no matter what people claim to "foresee." Thanks for the blessings and I wish you well, this is likely the last time you will hear from me.

          replyreport
          1. Castlepaloma profile image76
            Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            God is all powerful and all wise but has a very poor business managers to take care of him, God can't handle money. God spends too much money on promoting himself, and wars in his name

            replyreport
            1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              ROFLMAO!!!!!! lollollollol

              I'll have to remember that one, it was very good.

              replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        TORAH was entrusted to the Jews to bless every nation. Was it not? And since they failed, YHVH set them aside for a time to bring the Gentiles [those HE scattered throughout the nations] back into TORAH to be part of HIS BRIDE. Is not the Sabbath YHVH's wedding ring? Is not Shavout when YHVH gave HIS BRIDE, Israel the marriage covenant?  The House of Israel and the House of Judah are being gathered to the wedding NOW and that is what is most significant in the earth for both Jew and Gentile. "Gentiles" by the thousands are coming back to TORAH, keeping Shabbat, Pesach, Shavout and Tabernacles. Is that  not a sign to the Jew?

        replyreport
    3. ib radmasters profile image61
      ib radmastersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It is interesting that the Jews were there when Jesus came and went, and yet they chose not to believe.

      It is like the story about the angels who were in heaven and actually saw God, yet left heaven and God.

      And people today have neither seen God or Heaven and yet are dying to get there. Why? It wasn't good even for angels, are you better or smarter than angels.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        It is interesting indeed. Do you undestand why that is? Why the Jews (specifically the Pharisees and the Scribes) rejected Jesus?

        Just how many of the angels was Heaven "not good enough for?" Are you saying that they all left Heaven? Sort of like some wierd comic book?

        And your certitude that nobody has seen God in any way is based on what?

        replyreport
        1. profile image0
          Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Yes.

          The Jews were expecting a messiah who would kick butt and establish a kingdom on Earth, not in Heaven.

          replyreport
          1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
            ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Just wait awhile. HE WILL

            replyreport
          2. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Exactly, although now I can't remember if it was you I said that to or someone else.

            Even a lot of Christians don't understand that, which is sad.

            replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        people are dying to get to heaven, that is funny!  yes, they hope they get to heaven when they die.  But Yeshua proclaimed the kingdom of heaven is within you. And when you make Yeshua, THE WORD your true KING and take you off the throne, then you truly find heaven on earth.

        replyreport
    4. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How do you know the Bible is true?

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Of course there's always an element of faith involved, however for those of us who have known Jesus it's not that much faith. The fact is also that there are more extent copies of Scripture, both OT and NT, than any other writing, so although there are some differences and discrepancies, the study of the fragments and parchments, the comparisons and contrasts, means that we actually have better confirmation that the Bible we have is accurate than any other ancient book.

        I assume, however, that my first point is more germain to your question.

        replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        because the scripture is LIVING and speaks to me. When I say speaks, I don't mean audible like I might speak to you, but it is very, very meaningful. When I read, for instance, "I will never leave you, nor forsake you, saith the Lord." I KNOW YHVH means it. I KNOW HE is with me and will never abandon me.   When I read, "If you confess your sins, He is faithful and just to forgive you of your sins and to cleanse you from all unrighteousness." I KNOW HE forgives me all my sins and cleanses me, because I no longer fall into those same faults any more.   When I read, "He has not sent a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." I know that when fear comes to try to paralyze me it is not from our Father and I can refuse to allow it to stay.  That is just some of the living words HE has 'spoken' to me. That's how I KNOW it is true.

        Then there is 'He has made us accepted in the beloved."  This verse alone healed me from all of the rejection and abandonment issues i had due to having been repeatedly told I didn't do this or that right or good enough. and also from having been punished every time i turned around for no good reason.  I KNOW the Bible is true because His word healed me.

        replyreport
  11. Paul Wingert profile image59
    Paul Wingertposted 12 years ago

    The Bible is a collection of stories meant to be used as a teaching tool, not a history book. Of course if one travels to the areas mentioned in the Bible, Torah, and Koran, that archeological and historical evidence will be discovered during the those times. This pertains to any ancient story such as Beowulf and the Iliad. Even stories like Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer will give the modern reader of what life was like in the mid 19th century and of course there were slaves, riverboats, and the Mississippi River does exist. So when someone finds an archeological artifact found near the Red Sea, or whatever, so what? Unless it belonged to Joshua or Moses, and can be proven, even though the existence of Moses and Joshua can’t be, it doesn’t mean squat.  But is it comical when pro-creations try desperately to disprove evolution with no avail. It’s even funnier when they are asked where they get their info, they throw Biblical verses around. I mean just Biblical verses and nothing else. Too funny and pathetic at the same time.

    replyreport
  12. Druid Dude profile image61
    Druid Dudeposted 12 years ago

    Lot to be said about the descendants of those who perpetrated genocide because of cultural, philosophical, or differrences in skin color. If someone steals something, those who accept it and don't admit guilt and don't make restoration are just as guilty as the original thief. Give it all back, go back across the ocean, and maybe....just maybe...you'll be off the hook. You talk like religious people are the ONLY ones who ever killed someone. Didn't realize that godless people are trying for sainthood!smile

    replyreport
    1. Mark Knowles profile image58
      Mark Knowlesposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I am daily ashamed to be English, and freely admit to guilt by association and inheritance. I do feel this - which if my new age pals are to be believed is one step in the process of re-writing my karma. Unfortunately, I am powerless to provide restitution, but have long since come to terms with that inability. My best excuse is I did not really understand until I was too old to be stupid enough to throw my life away trying. Best I can do is make my fellows aware of our past mis-deeds, protest to the best of my abilities when I see us repeating the past and encourage the younger people I come into contact with to look critically at the British Political system,  religions, corporations and Royal family.

      Still - what  really matters is you defended the faithful. Never really understood the whole, "It is OK that Christians murder because secular people murder," argument.

      I believe they call this a logical fallacy. I prefer the term "Liars for Jesus," myself. Sorry you don't understand, but I get why you need to hide your name, Dude.

      You are no Druid either.

      replyreport
      1. twosheds1 profile image60
        twosheds1posted 12 years agoin reply to this

        I feel your pain, Mark. My ancestors may have had a part in the slave trade, and then there's the whole Native American genocide thing (which is still going on). What I've tried to do is educate people about past misdeeds and try to make them aware of current situations which have come from those misdeeds. The current plight of Native Americans is a good example. A lot of people in the US don't realize than NA's have by far the highest rates of poverty, alcholism, and incarceration per capita. Most of the people I tell about this don't do anything about it, but I hope by raising awareness (I really hate that term) the larger picture will change.

        replyreport
      2. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
        ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Yeshua practices neither Judaism nor Christianity. Yeshua is KING of all nations. Yeshua is LOVE. He accepts all men. The armies that labeled themselves Christians that killed all that refused to conform were not Christians in the sense that those first called Christians or little Christs were. Those first Christians gave their lives for their faith in HIM. They went right to be with their Messiah when they were killed.

        The "Christian armies" that went about killing all who failed to assimilate into the "NEW" form of Christianity established by Constantine that included sacrifices to pagan gods and the sun god mithras WERE NOT Christians in the original sense of that word. They were counterfeits!

        replyreport
  13. Druid Dude profile image61
    Druid Dudeposted 12 years ago

    There is a thought which you, any of you can have, which can explain all of these mysteries,

    replyreport
    1. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      What mysteries?

      replyreport
  14. noenhulk profile image60
    noenhulkposted 12 years ago

    I believe them and some of the evidence are already surfacing all over the internet and historical museum. The authenticity of the bible is shown on the proof and evidence displayed on different parts of the globe. Not only where Jesus lived and died.

    replyreport
  15. artblack01 profile image61
    artblack01posted 12 years ago

    The Bible is no more historically accurate than Harry Potter is, Jesus is no more a historically real person than Zeus, Huck Finn, Hercules, Thor, the Chupacabra... etc.  There are historic peoples, but they have writings from their own hand, people they have met personally that wrote about when they met, artifacts that proved they existed, Julius Cesar, Alexander the Great, Washington, Aristotle,

    replyreport
  16. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    There is far more objectivity when one is convincing enough that others write about them. Jesus didn't need to toot his own horn. He knew others would because of what they saw with their own eyes. That's God way of keeping anyone from self glorification...even of his own Son...Jesus! Self- preservation is always life highest aim even if they feel threatened by God. And so it was with Jesus. The Pharisees did not want to give up their power....none of us do! And they convince the multitudes to shout out crucify...crucify. The power of the Word did not stumble even though Israel did.  the Word keeps going on....and on ...and on. So it is here before you and I despite all the unbelief from most of the world also.  God's word is so objective even it's own writers admit their unrighteousness.   Sorry Mark Twain will come and in time go but the word of God lives on. And that's where I place my bet!!

    replyreport
    1. artblack01 profile image61
      artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "He knew others would because of what they saw with their own eyes."  Who were these fictional people who saw anything with their own eyes.
      Zeus and Hercules are far older than the word of God, in fact there are still people who unfortunately believe this junk.  Believe me when the world becomes more educated God and Jesus will pass as fairy tales as well.
      That is where I place my Bet!

      replyreport
      1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
        DoubleScorpionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Speaking of "other Gods"...I saw a funny post the other day...

        "The God of the Bible promised to destroy all evil people, Odin promised to destroy all Ice Giants...I don't see any Ice Giants around, Do you? "

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Maybe it was a metaphors for the ice caps and global warming?!?! Ha ha.

          replyreport
      2. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        They weren't fictional, they were real human beings who known by other real human beings, the early church fathers.

        replyreport
        1. artblack01 profile image61
          artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          If you say so, but you're gonna have to do more than affirm them to make someone who is fictional real.
          Take most movies, just because people they wrote about who were fictional interact with people who are real doesn't make the story or the characters any less fictional.

          replyreport
          1. Chris Neal profile image76
            Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            So what you're saying is that Augustine and Iraneus were also fictional?

            replyreport
  17. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    That's the problem with mythology, it's make believe. Nothing but the imagination of men. There never really was any ice giants...so why should you see them?  But there are evil people which is something the Bible makes clear and is true. However, what the Bible really says is that evil people will ultimately destroy themselves.  That's a fact that truly can be proven with nuclear weaponry at our disposal. Ask the military gurus that all it takes is one idiot thru greed, power, hatred for others you name it and everything we've build can come tumbling down and even the good folks would be subject to it's fallout.  Good luck with the mythical gods in that day for those who seek them out.

    The season is ripe for unbelief in God, who gave us Jesus Christ who is real and tangible, to magnify itself like never before. I can understand why our God offers to the Church a mystery doctrine known as the Rapture to have hope in.  Zeus where are your words of wisdom? Astrology what can you tell us of the potential of evil in men? Perhaps God knew his creation would reach a point of self annihilation because of the sin which lies embedded in each and everyone of us! Mankind has reached the point where he can truly determine his own destiny universally around the globe.  Remember the arsenal that lies in the ground, under the oceans and in the laboratories across the world.  Yes, my friend wicked and self- centered people that Bible speak well about. That's not a myth...that's a reality people are living around the world often as victims!

    replyreport
    1. DoubleScorpion profile image77
      DoubleScorpionposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Not to pick...But how is the belief in the Greek or Roman Gods (mythology) any different from the belief in the Christian God(s)?

      No-one has seen any of them. So we are left with a personal feeling or interpretation.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Ah, but you're wrong! Many people have seen God (singular, no amount of arguing to the contrary has ever made it so.) It's just that you don't see God the same way you would see another human being.

        He is everywhere!

        replyreport
  18. Felixedet2000 profile image59
    Felixedet2000posted 12 years ago

    Chasuk, why don't you get us a copy of the Buddhist book or whatever it is. so we can go through and then start something like this with your religion in focus?
    what has Christianity done to you that other religion have not done?

    replyreport
    1. Josak profile image60
      Josakposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      OH the ignorance... So much ignorance.

      replyreport
    2. Castlepaloma profile image76
      Castlepalomaposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      My list, my pastor Brother dose not speck to me because I am not a Christian and he prays for my Atheist Mother not to go to hell (too late) I lost jobs of building Eco sustainable homes because a group Christians,   and my very long list goes on to War budgets, prisons, murder rates. etc etc...

      replyreport
    3. profile image0
      Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I don't have a religion. If I did, it would probably be secular Buddhism.

      replyreport
  19. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    The mysterious Bible book "Book of Revelations" sits in the shadows and sits on the shelves of most homes in USA. And many other places around the world. It isn't hid you don;t have to go digging for and spend tons of money most don't have or have doctorate degree to get some understanding from it! Nope...God don't want anyone to not know but He also can declare I told you so! The staying power of any truth with substance is that no matter what you or I think..it is still there before us! When we are dead and buried God's word will still be there for the next generation.

    replyreport
    1. artblack01 profile image61
      artblack01posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      So will homer's odessey and many other things written before the bible. Books last a long time because of librarians like this friend of mine who says, "even if you and everyone thinks this book is bullshit, even if it IS bullshit, it is still something someone wrote and we should keep it forever."
      It was in reference to me saying we should burn it. It was a copy of Mein Kampf.

      replyreport
      1. Chris Neal profile image76
        Chris Nealposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Oooooh! Talk about wide ranging...

        Homer - No one actually knows if there even WAS a Homer (well, except God of course,) and although the Illiad and the Odyssey are both beautiful works (and violent! The war scenes from the Illiad could give a lot modern film makers a run for their money!) and classics, they wouldn't have been written for four hundred years after Homer died! They are classics for a reason, though!

        Mein Kampf - It is and it isn't, you know, what you said. Your librarian friend was wrong though, we shouldn't keep it just because someone wrote it. The world would not be a poorer place if The Story of O or Lolita were to disappear. Or Fifty Shades of Gray, for that matter. Mein Kampf is literal history, Hitler's blueprint for what he intended to do once he seized power, and he stuck fairly close to it for a long time. And with so many people trying to deny the Holocaust these days (not just Ahmadinejad, also liberal intellectuals from what I understand,) it's important to keep the record not just of the results but that the intent was there for all to see. But then again, I'm an armchair historian, what do I know?

        The Bible - Ah! The most printed, most widely read and most influential book in history! It's not a myth. And it's important to be able to study the words of Jesus, because so many people want to judge it without knowing them!

        replyreport
  20. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    Your facts are quite wrong. Homer is a myth created during the Greek era which was about 200-400 BC.  By the way that is before Christ lived...another amazing observation. The world dated on the observance of Jesus. History is tracked by this dating scheme.  the Bible begins giving us a world report under Moses's era....roughly 1200 BC. Many of the Old Testament books were written quite early in fact the Book of Job is even earlier and considered the first book of inspired writing as commanded by God.  I am sure there were writings before then by earlier kingdoms but none that matches the scope and breath and sheer historical detail even before Moses was born with such audacity and yet accuracy.  Good luck with Homer.......

    replyreport
  21. BeachMonarch profile image60
    BeachMonarchposted 12 years ago

    So whats the actual rational explanation for an atheist? If you don't mind, please provide an elaborate answer.

    replyreport
    1. profile image0
      Chasukposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The Bible is as historically accurate as can be expected from a collection of works without history as their primary purpose. That would be my answer as a theist or an atheist. I don't believe in anything supernatural, so of course I don't believe the historical elements.

      replyreport
  22. Druid Dude profile image61
    Druid Dudeposted 12 years ago

    The history is basically hebrew. One tribe out of twelve, and we don't know if the other tribes had their own Book, their own traditions. It does name many peoples, including the Egyptians and the Hittites, who were historically existant, but, your last statement makes a good point, The Bible's old testament is a hebrew story about hebrews, which they tend to accept as 'their history', but, keep in mind:History is written by the victor, and many ancient cultures were wiped from the earth. Even the history we accept, has been revised several times. For instance, Gen. George Custer, within the last fifty years, has gone from American hero/icon, to something just this side of egotistical, bloodthirsty murderer intent on the wanton destruction of the Sioux people.

    replyreport
    1. ShalahChayilJOY profile image61
      ShalahChayilJOYposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How come there are still Jews today when so many peoples have not survived persecution, extinction, annihilation?

      replyreport
  23. javedshaikm profile image61
    javedshaikmposted 12 years ago

    There are numerous versions of Bible, which need some time for counting, accuracy does not have versions....

    replyreport
  24. Druid Dude profile image61
    Druid Dudeposted 12 years ago

    DAMN Cagsil...wonderful statement! No kidding! Paul. My theory is, is that Muhammad found the Ark (W/ a 'K') inside the temple mount, touched it, and 'ascended' to heaven. ZZZAAAPPP!

    replyreport
  25. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    Because scientists discover how something work in the cosmos doesn't deny the power of God in creating it. They can explain the rainbow now but it is God who stated it and even gave the reason for it after the Great Flood.  God created man from the dust of the earth...Then it shouldn't be a surprise that he can raise a dead man back to life! The surprise is our inability to accept the reality of God's power. And the only reason his word takes meticulous care in presenting his power is that you believe He is! He set's the standard not you or I. And if God decides that the plan is "lack of belief" means "lack of reward" so be it. The Bible don't have to be....but the fact is...it is, and time itself has not remove it from our generation in this day.  It's as if when want's to reveal himself.....no one has an excuse for not knowing.

    replyreport
    1. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      And, there's nothing to say that a G/god created it to begin with. lol

      replyreport
  26. RustyW profile image69
    RustyWposted 12 years ago

    Prove that it isn't?

    replyreport
    1. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      lol lol

      replyreport
  27. LadyMacabre profile image61
    LadyMacabreposted 12 years ago

    It's hard to decide if it's historically accurate, considering the Bible completely left out the rest of the world.

    replyreport
  28. Civil War Bob profile image61
    Civil War Bobposted 12 years ago

    The book, "1421:The Year China Discovered the World" is about China...there is no mention of Alexander the Great, Jesus and the Middle East, nor most of the rest of the world other than the parts touched by the Chinese Armada.  The Bible was  written about a specific set of historical events with a point: God sent the Messiah first to the Jews, then to all the rest of the world, a.k.a., the Gentiles!

    replyreport
  29. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    The Bible is historically quite accurate and it's apply to all the world.  All men have a moral conscious and all men die because of one reason....we are all born in Adam's sin nature.  No one escape that reality.  God explains how we got the many different languages as told in the event of the Tower of Babel.  God explains that a savior to the world will be sent and that means all people.  But God also said the savior will come thru the seed of a woman....not women.  So no matter who he picked there still would be others refusing to believe.  Also a final note is this, the Book of Revelations in the Bible is a dictation against a world of unbelievers...meaning many nations therefore many people and races and economic status.  God really doesn't leave anyone out when His Grace expires and Judgement steps in! 

    Few people give Satan much credit...but if he can cause Adam and Eve to fall when they had everything but one tree forbidden. He can surely blind a world which has far more temptation with many trees (of false religions and concepts) instead of the one Tree of Life...Jesus Christ!! God isn't hiding the savior men just keep running from him because of their sin...same as Adam did in the garden! And just like Adam blamed Eve....the world is always blaming somebody else!!

    replyreport
    1. Cagsil profile image70
      Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It is applied to those who read it.

      You are not to apply it to someone else's life. But, nice try.

      Do as I say, not as I do is a bigots perspective and completely dishonest.

      replyreport
    2. jacharless profile image74
      jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Apparently, someone missed the entire edict regarding salvation. Might be useful to revisit, for good measure.

      BTW, the "Book of Revelation" is not what most think or have been taught. Check out the opening line for the answer to what the Letter ACTUALLY is.

      PSS, Adam never actually blamed Eve. Cuz when you're stoned on information, it is kind of difficult to make sense. Explains why his original response was, "Um, I am naked and afraid". The BC 60's were a trip. lol
      James.

      replyreport
    3. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think you may need to re-read the bible. No one was born in the sin of Adam. They weren't even born into that in the time of Jesus. It's absolved in Ezekiel that no one is born a sinner. Everyone is born clean and without sin and remains that way unless they change it.

      This is a prime example though of people claiming to have read something that they haven't actually read before. Or at least, have not read all of.

      replyreport
  30. gregb4hope profile image71
    gregb4hopeposted 12 years ago

    The Book of Revelations is primarily a book the reveals Christ in all his fullness after the world collapses into vicious cycle of desperate power grabbing with nuclear weaponry at it's disposal.  Jesus actually states that if He had not returned no flesh would be saved in that day.  Hard to believe the words when they were written 2,000 years ago. Not hard to believe now, in fact it is very possible.  Skeptics do a poor job of biblical interpretation....yours is no different.

    replyreport
    1. jacharless profile image74
      jacharlessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Really? After the world collapses, huh?
      Okay hot shot, explain this passage then: Rev 20.5
      When did this event occur?
      Now, mind you, it is mentioned TWICE in the same paragraph...

      replyreport
  31. GERALD-710 profile image60
    GERALD-710posted 12 years ago

    Yes,the Bible is historically accurate.In fact it is one of the most historically accurate books today.How do we know this?Because several stories in the Bible have been verified by non-bibilical sources and in many cases,people who were against the jews and the christians themselves.
    The earliest authentifications are none other than from Egypt itself.The story of Joseph and the enslavement of the Israelites coincides well with several events in Egypt.At the time Joseph was kidnapped,the Hysoks,an asiatic nomadic group had invaded Egypt and had grabbed power.Being immigrants themselves,its little wonder that they were sympathetic to Jacob and his kin and allowed them to settle in Egypt.There is a gap between Genesis and Exodus during which the Hysoks were overthrown and the Egyptians came to power.Ramses 3rd i presume is the Pharaoh of exodus.Although egyptian records tell nothing of the enslavement of the israelites,the walls of Abu Simbel and Karnak tell plenty.Ramses was a slave driver(or how do you think he carved out the temple at Abu Simbel).Egyptian walls show the enslavement of nubians,libyans and several other light skinned people who could well be israelites.
    I will explain the 10 plagues at a later time.
    As for the parting of the Red Sea.To start with,remember Moses lived in the Sinai region for years and even got married there.While herding sheep he must have observed the interesting phenomena that occurs there.
    The Red sea mentioned in the Bible is not our red sea.Translating the Bible left out an e
    The Reed sea is the sea of exodus and yes,during a strong wind,it was known to retreat leaving a string of lakes in the desert then abruptly come back when the mediterranean sea was at high tide(Even the map of Exodus shows the route of the israelites was through the reed sea).As mentioned,Moses,living in Sinai must have observed this and staged the whole thing(The Reed sea partitioning stopped when the Suez canal was built.) and staged the crossing,knowing fully when the tide will return and drown the army(Ramses 3 also knew of it it seems.He didnt drown with the rest)
    40 Years in the wilderness.Yup,what better way to brainwash a whole community and ensure the generation that was in Egypt died out?
    The conquest of Cannan is kinda self explanatory.There would be no israelite state if there was no such conquest.
    The Bible often mentions the Philistines,a people found in both Greek,Phoencian and Egyptian history.Known as the sea peoples,they spread terror on the eastern mediterranean after the fall of Troy(they were from Crete).They settled in the plains between the judean highlands and the mediterranean sea.Little wonder they were so powerful,they survived joshua's conquest and remained a constant threat to the israelite state/states and in many cases often destroyed their cities(death of Saul)and after Uzziah,occupied western Judah,it took the Babylonians to destroy them.
    Scrolls found in Jordan belonging to the kingdom of Ammon mentioned king david.These scrolls prove that a)the child of incest between lot and one of his daughters lived!b)David existed
    One of the best bibilical proofs of its historical accuracy lies in Egypt(again).2 choronicles mentions King Shishalk invading Israel and Judah and razing Megiddo to the ground.This battle is glorified in Karnak.A whole wall dedicated to it.
    Parts 2 and 3 coming soon

    replyreport
  32. ErinGorney profile image64
    ErinGorneyposted 12 years ago

    Doesn't anyone realize that out of the 2,500 comments posted to this thread, all anyone of you have accomplished is bashing one another and go around in circles... accomplishing nothing but repeating yourselfs???  NO one is going to win this debate because RELIGION is controversial and theorized differently to everyones own personal interpreations of the content.

    The orignal question was Would the World be a better place id there were less christians? IT WAS A QUESTION for everyone own personal feelings.. you all have gone off the deep end.. get a grip of youself and move on...

    replyreport
    1. profile image0
      SirDentposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Is the Bible historically accurate? is the actual title of this thread and the comment count is 303 before I post mine.

      replyreport
      1. ErinGorney profile image64
        ErinGorneyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        WOW.... that was what you had to say. Good reply.. real educated response right there.

        replyreport
        1. profile image0
          SirDentposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          I did, at least, post it in the right thread.

          replyreport
    2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
      EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It seems that you possibly have a reading comprehension problem. Not good for a writer at all. When whether or not the Bible is historically accurate becomes about the world being better with out Christians, someone really doesn't know what they are reading. Perhaps researching what your reading before you decide to get upity and comment on it might be good?

      replyreport
      1. Cagsil profile image70
        Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

        Oh please. Your post is so condescending it's not even funny. Erin is a new member, been here 8 days. So give advice and try to be helpful, but leave the condescension out of it. hmm

        replyreport
        1. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
          EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          I'll remember that in the future Cagsil, I don't check join dates and such when responding to anyone.

          replyreport
          1. ErinGorney profile image64
            ErinGorneyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Its pretty lovely when you are new to this site, still getting the feel of how things work... and then you get your ass chewed out by an asshole. How do you know my writing abilities through one comment?

            Let me educate you. I am a college graduate, I had a 12th grade reading comprehension level in 3rd grade. I have written and published a book. I have won awards for my poetry.

            I am way above average in the national scoring for English, Literature and writing.

            So before you go and comment on my education and writing abilities think twice. I take pride in being educated. That is the one thing I will not let go of.

            replyreport
            1. Cagsil profile image70
              Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              Bad move. hmm

              replyreport
              1. ErinGorney profile image64
                ErinGorneyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                Glad to know, I shouldn't mention the background of my education...

                replyreport
                1. Cagsil profile image70
                  Cagsilposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  That's not why I said what I said. hmm

                  http://hubpages.com/help/forum_rules

                  replyreport
            2. EinderDarkwolf profile image60
              EinderDarkwolfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

              All that doesn't hold water when you can't read the title of a thread, which was obvious by your comment. Which leads me to believe you are either out right lieing to try and impress someone, or you purposefully ignored the title just so you could try and pick a fight. Either way, doesn't really matter to me.

              As for being an asshole, well if you want to think that, go ahead. I could quite frankly careless. Keep going though, I would like to see if my opinion of you, based off the posts I've seen, is correct or not.

              replyreport
              1. ErinGorney profile image64
                ErinGorneyposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                OK, I do not believe I picked the fight, when you replied to me. Either way, good job at showing you don't care, when you took all this time to respond.

                Happy writing to you.

                replyreport
  33. A Thousand Words profile image69
    A Thousand Wordsposted 12 years ago

    Ok, folks. Y'all need a mediator or something. Einder, Erin just posted in the wrong forum by accident. It happens. Erin, this is a bad first impression of Einder, he's a pretty neat guy. Come on kiddies. Kiss and make up. No one questions your intelligence Erin. And Einder's not really an asshole, he was simply pointing out the fact that you had a lot to say about the wrong topic. Einder, I doubt Erin was purposefully being dishonest. Simple mistake. That's all.

    replyreport
  34. IAmAnAtheist profile image61
    IAmAnAtheistposted 12 years ago

    Lol that was way too funny. smile

    replyreport
  35. Lawrence Da-vid profile image60
    Lawrence Da-vidposted 12 years ago

    The "Holy Bible" is the best guide we have to date, and is open to interpretation.  Remember though, the "Good Book," is a readers digest of condensed books written by myriad different men of the past.  Each giving views regarding the past.  I wasn't there when each book was written, although, many think I am that old.  I didn't write each book, and I surely didn't and wouldn't stand on a pulpit to give my personal opinion or views regarding it.  I can remember vividly when Dr. Robert Schuller made the statement "I am going to send "so-and-so" a new bible to replace the severely edited edition she now possesses.  Supernatural interaction at this date cannot be proven or dis-proven, and for the most part are the views of a current group of people trying to "read between the lines."

    replyreport
jump to first post
 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

 Necessary
 Features
 Marketing
 Statistics

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)