CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Religion A-Z › The Bible
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Bible

post #1 of 15
3/29/02 at 6:09pm
Thread Starter 
And this should not be limited to internal meaning, the Bible can also be viewed as a historical document; a profound influencer of culture; a book people read; a danger; a divine work; a useful moral tale, and an excellent—or poor—literary work.

The Bible, spiritual and actual.
Reply
post #2 of 15
3/29/02 at 6:33pm
I've read it cover to cover. I see the value, and I certainly see the reason so many people are iffy on religion.
Reply
post #3 of 15
3/29/02 at 7:21pm
I've also read it cover to cover and have re-read (Is that a word?) the new testament, many, many times. I believe it to be the inspired word of God. I believe that there are parts (ie: Revelations) that are more symbolic in nature, because it is a man trying to describe visions that God has shown him that are hard to comprehend. I hate to use the "Onion" analogy, but it works here. The Bible has many layers to it and if you really study it, you'll constantly find new things in there. Mathew is my favorite book and chapter 6 especially. I am always learning.
Reply
post #4 of 15
3/29/02 at 7:33pm
I might sound like a bad apple for this.
But I haven't read the whole thing.

There are times when I really get into and times when I don't.

I did do bible studies, bible camps, etc. But never read the whole thing entirely.

From my experience so far. I have to say the bibly is like a documentary. Boring at times but inspiring and teaching in others.

It has Fables, wild tales, sex, the whole nine yards.

I say the bible is a big smorgasboard (did I spell that right?) of life, beliefs, etc, etc.
Reply
post #5 of 15
4/1/02 at 6:24pm
Well, practicing a religion and believing in God, Christ, Vishnu, or Allah are two totally different things.

Belief is a good thing. Religions -as we've come to see- are not always.
Reply
post #6 of 15
4/1/02 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Dj Homeless:
That doesn't mean that everything is happy. I will never truely believe in a religion that segregates homosexuals, abortion and anything else that constricts our freedom. But on everything it's done, and will do, it is defintely something we can't live without.

..course, that's just what I think.
What a bizarre statement. That's like saying you hate the Constitution or state laws because they restrict our freedom to do anything we want (like drive without a license or murder someone). Abortion is never once mentioned in the Bible. Pro-lifers apply one of the Ten Commandments to that question. But I suppose those are way too restrictive... probably we should throw most or all of them out as well. wink
Reply
post #7 of 15
4/3/02 at 6:57pm
Quote:
Dj Homeless:
All right, lemme clarify. The message (ie. religion) is good, but how we've interpreted it is sometimes bizzare. As I said, while I may not believe, and will never, I can't bash religion itself. It's helpful. Has been, will be. The Bible is important. It's the people I have a problem with.

Seriously though, I get heated up (and not in a good way) when things like abortion and homosexuality are hated because of people who use religion as an excuse for their side. In my perfect little world, if their's a God, I'm sure he can't care if someone is gay...
I'll go along with what you said concerning people's weird interpretation of the Bible. Won't mention any specific groups but there are certainly a lot of odd takes on the Book.

As far as homosexuality and abortion are concerned. On the first matter, if you believe that the Bible is good then you have to deal with what it says about homosexuality in both the OT and the NT. You don't have to agree or disagree, just think about it. Concerning abortion, religion is not the first thing that enters into it for me. The fetus is a baby, a human life. That's plain to me. At this time it's legal to take that life. I think that's wrong. I also believe it violates God's command to "love our neighbor as ourself". Nothing more neighborly than a baby. But if you aren't a Christian this doesn't apply to you. But once again if you like the Bible you have to deal with what it says about murder.
Reply
post #8 of 15
4/3/02 at 7:14pm
I think the bible is an interesting work of fiction.
Reply
post #9 of 15
4/3/02 at 9:06pm
I believe the Bible is a series of inspirational works that were written by men who more than likely sincerely believed they were being inspired by a divine presence. That there was an actual divine presence involved in their writing is what I question.
Reply
post #10 of 15
4/3/02 at 11:18pm
Thread Starter 
I started the Bible, but never finished. Chalk it up to short attention span.
Reply
post #11 of 15
4/5/02 at 2:26pm
Quote:
Jacob Singer:
I think the bible is an interesting work of fiction.
Do you believe it to be fiction in it's entirety? Archaeologists and historians would probably disagree. Jesus lived. Paul lived. Moses lived. We really have no reason to assume otherwise.

Are parts of it fictional? Sure. But the whole thing? No.
Reply
post #12 of 15
4/5/02 at 4:41pm
Well, Caleb Carr's book The Alienist contains historical figures such as Teddy Roosevelt, but it is obviously fiction. Including historic names and dates doesn't prove it's veracity.

And, as an aside, there IS in fact serious scholarly debate about the actual historical existence of Jesus Christ.
Reply
post #13 of 15
4/5/02 at 5:24pm
Quote:
Jacob Singer:
Well, Caleb Carr's book The Alienist contains historical figures such as Teddy Roosevelt, but it is obviously fiction. Including historic names and dates doesn't prove it's veracity.

And, as an aside, there IS in fact serious scholarly debate about the actual historical existence of Jesus Christ.
I've read it and it's a fine book. That and it's sequel would make a fine movie. Is it your contention that the authors of the Bible were willfully lying or creating a fiction? What do you base your belief on?

As for the scholarly debate about the existence of Jesus, even the memebers of the Jesus Seminar (a "liberal" group of historians and theologians) whose purpose was to determine if he existed and who he was, agree that he is a real historical figure. I am unaware of any current serious historical evidence that he didn't. What people are in general disagreement about are the claims that Christians say he made.
Reply
post #14 of 15
4/5/02 at 6:40pm
Here's just one article:

<a href="http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html" target="_blank">http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html</a>

Now I'm not saying that I take this all at face value, nor am I trying to convince people that he did not exist, I just supply it to show that there is STILL ongoing debate about historical Jesus.
Reply
post #15 of 15
4/6/02 at 2:54pm
Quote:
Jacob Singer:
Here's just one article:

<a href="http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html" target="_blank">http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html</a>

Now I'm not saying that I take this all at face value, nor am I trying to convince people that he did not exist, I just supply it to show that there is STILL ongoing debate about historical Jesus.
There sure is. As I said "I am unaware of any current serious historical evidence that he didn't. What people are in general disagreement about are the claims that Christians say he made." Here are some articles that support Jesus historicity. Not that I agree with all the points that they make.

<a href="http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html" target="_blank">http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html</a>

More later gotta run.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Religion A-Z
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Religion A-Z › The Bible