Using the Bible as fact...

quote:

---

Originally posted by thatstretchyguy:
[b]I think I'll take a stab at answering the original post.

​

The Bible is accepted as an historically accurate document by the Smithsonian Institute and others.[/QUOTE]

​

Interesting claim. I am wondering if you can back it up, because I really have some doubts that it is accurate. Can you please provide an explanation, with links, preferably, of why it is that you think that the Smithsonian holds that the Bible is an accurate historical document?

​

quote:

---

Parts of it are used in public school textbooks when teaching about Old Testament era peoples or events.

---

​

Well, sure, it can show customs and cultural attitudes of the time, but this is not the same as being a record of actual events.

​

quote:

---

I think we can all agree that the bible is HISTORICALLY accurate.

---

​

Hold on! How did you make this leap? There are Biblical scholars who doubt that Jesus was even a real person, and others who believe that the Apostles wrote the gospels with the Torah open beside them, and rewrote the old stories with Jesus in them in order to fulfill the prophecies.

​

Lastly, there isn't even any good evidence that the Jews even existed at the time that the Pharohs were building the Pyramids, so the Jews couldn't have been enslaved by the Egyptians to build them.

​

quote:

---

Now, that having been settled, let's move on to a pivotal event in the history of Christianity - the resurrection of Christ from the dead. If this is false, then Christianity itself is false. Jesus's tomb is empty. But people could have stolen the body, right? The Pharisees wouldn't have stolen it, because they wanted to prove him wrong. If they stole the body, they would have then produced it and denounced Jesus. This did not happen.

---

​

You don't even have evidence that Jesus actually existed beyond the Bible. At least, you haven't provided any.

​

quote:

---

The disciples didn't steal the body because they went on to die often horrible deaths for their faith. Why would they die for something they would know to be a lie?

---

​

Again, you cannot provide any evidence that these events happened.

​

quote:

---

It just doesn't make sense.

---

​

On this we agree, but for different reasons, I'm afraid.

​

[QUOTE]This all leads to the assumption that the bible is SPIRITUALLY accurate, as well as historically accurate.[/b]

---

They are assumptions which are not based upon evidence, which is fine for a religion, but not for historical or scientific accuracy.------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

​

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-31-2002]

​

[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 03-31-2002]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TrueCreation:
[b]"Well, sure, it can show customs and cultural attitudes of the time, but this is not the same as being a record of actual events."
--The bible is used for the origin of Abraham's decendents,[/QUOTE]

​

I'm not sure why this is relevant.

​

quote:

---

the bible doesn't exactly address much other cultural origins so in the first place, I don't know what else it would be used for.

---

​

Cultural "origins"? I wasn't talking about the "origins" of culture or customs.

​

If you read the Bible, you get a pretty good idea of the culture and customs of the time. For example, you learn that slavery was in practice, and that women were considered chattel.

​

[QUOTE]Second, they of course would not wan't to touch up on many other religious, let alone many other events given in the old-testament, mostly because it is all God ordained.
[/b]

---

Huh, what are you talking about? I don't understand.

quote:

---

"For example, you learn that slavery was in practice, and that women were considered chattel."
--The problem with this notion, is that it implies that slavery is horrible.

---

Well, no, the statement doesn't imply that. It says it existed, that's all.

quote:

---

But why is it horrible, when you think of slavery you tend to think of the whips and the lashes and the different harsh treatments. This is condemned in the bible to 'all' people, and so, a 'slave', is more accuratly a 'servant' a more proper in-context biblical translation.

---

Ah, no, I don't think so. "Servant" implies "paid employee with rights", not "human being owned by another".

quote:

---

Basically being a servant was like being a child with responsibilities in todays american culture.

---

What a load of apologist, revisionist crap, TC.

quote:

---

--As for women, its a bit analogous to the above. Women are at a bit of a lower level than men, after all, who was it who picked the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil first?

---

Ah, I see that you are a lovely mysogynist-in-the-making, TC. Just what we need in this world.Let me tell you something.Women are not at any kind of lower level than men. That they are viewed this way by certain sects of Christianity is one of the most demeaning, ugly, hateful, spirit-destroying attitudes that was ever propagated by any institution in history. It is a convenient way to blame everything on women and to justify male privilage.This attitude requires all Christian women to hate themselves and live their life feeling guilty.This disgusts and saddens me. [QUOTE]"Huh, what are you talking about? I don't understand."
--The separation of church and state in the history books. This is probably why they omit, say, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, or mention of the the exile of Moses without the word 'myth' used in the same sentance.
[/B][/QUOTE]Gee, I wonder why they don't include every unverified religious story in every history book without qualifying it with the word "myth"?What is your evidence OTHER THAN THE BIBLE for these events, TC?Goodness, you ARE a sloppy-minded scholar.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joz:
[b] [QUOTE]Originally posted by TrueCreation:
[b]I found this Q&A site a good reference: /b][/QUOTE]ROTFLMGDAOTC just cited material from Landover baptist....lets see what else we can find there....Hmmm atheist merchandise....Could this be... a spoof site?????

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 04-02-2002][/B][/QUOTE]ROTFLMAO!!!Gee, I wonder if this qualifies as "accepting anything which seems to support your position, regardless of quality"?LOLOLOLOL!!!------------------
"We will still have perfect freedom to hold contrary views of our own, but to simply
close our minds to the knowledge painstakingly accumulated by hundreds of thousands
of scientists over long centuries is to deliberately decide to be ignorant and narrow-
minded."-Steve Allen, from "Dumbth"

No comments, TC??