|
Author
|
Topic: Is the bible the word of God or men?
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 4 of 309 (429972)
10-22-2007 8:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3 by bluescat48
10-22-2007 7:37 PM
|
|
Re: Bible is no big deal
bump Edited by trossthree, : new comment -p.s. Edited by trossthree, : No reason given.
Thanks trossthree
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3 by bluescat48, posted 10-22-2007 7:37 PM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 5 of 309 (429974)
10-22-2007 8:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by sidelined
10-13-2007 9:33 AM
|
|
repost
Greetings, The scriptures in the Bible(not just in the bible though) have been hand copied for thousands of years and therefor it may not contain any of the original meaning(we have no autographs). Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given.
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by sidelined, posted 10-13-2007 9:33 AM | | sidelined has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 8 of 309 (429985)
10-22-2007 10:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 6 by pelican
10-22-2007 9:09 PM
|
|
Re: repost
Heinrik,
Heinrik writes:
Do you mean that the bible can be interpreted metaphorically rather than literally
I mean that the Bible is only and should only be interpreted metaphorically.
Thanks trossthree
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 6 by pelican, posted 10-22-2007 9:09 PM | | pelican has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
subconscious,
subconcious writes:
everything else after in the bible could be considered the inspired word of God as transcribed by men. but the torah is the word of God deliverd by God.
Are you describing that God/elohim/eloheim/yahwah/lol/ has some scripture in Heaven that it delivered to Moses on Mt Sinai?
Thanks trossthree
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by subconscious, posted 10-22-2007 10:23 PM | | subconscious has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
subconscious,
subconscious writes:
the word is both literal and metaphorical. the bible is an extremely encoded compilation.
Show me an example. Quote some scripture and give me a short commentary.
Thanks trossthree
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 9 by subconscious, posted 10-22-2007 10:45 PM | | subconscious has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
arachnophilia, I can see that you didn't read the thread. Perhaps you should read the thread. Edited by trossthree, : err
Thanks trossthree
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 20 of 309 (430185)
10-23-2007 4:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 13 by Kapyong
10-22-2007 11:26 PM
|
|
Re: repost
...bump Edited by trossthree, : err Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given.
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 13 by Kapyong, posted 10-22-2007 11:26 PM | | Kapyong has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 21 by Kapyong, posted 10-23-2007 6:19 PM | | Force has replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 30 of 309 (431596)
10-31-2007 11:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 21 by Kapyong
10-23-2007 6:19 PM
|
|
Re: repost
...bump Edited by trossthree, : err Edited by trossthree, : err Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given.
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 21 by Kapyong, posted 10-23-2007 6:19 PM | | Kapyong has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 31 by jar, posted 10-31-2007 11:54 PM | | Force has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 44 of 309 (436107)
11-24-2007 1:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 43 by sidelined
11-21-2007 4:38 PM
|
|
Re: SAMBEE
Sidelined, Please reference the scripture. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given.
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 43 by sidelined, posted 11-21-2007 4:38 PM | | sidelined has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 45 by sidelined, posted 11-24-2007 2:00 PM | | Force has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
Re: More contradicton
Granny Magda,
If he wrote that himself, about himself, then surely Moses must have been the most arrogant of men. This was pointed out by Thomas Paine over two centuries ago. This is irrelevant to the topic.
I find it hard to believe that people in this day and age still take the word of the bible as the word of god, via Moses. It is clearly written much later, by multiple authors. It is clearly written by multiple authors; hence the word: "Bible".
Thank you
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
Re: More contradicton
Dr Adequate,
Dr. Adequate writes: Huh? The word "Bible" comes from the Greek and Latin words for "book", it has nothing to do with multiple authorship as such.
No.
early 14c., from Anglo-L. biblia, from M.L./L.L. biblia (neuter plural interpreted as fem. sing.), in phrase biblia sacra "holy books," from Gk. ta biblia to hagia "the holy books," from biblion "paper, scroll," the ordinary word for "book," originally a dim. of byblos "Egyptian papyrus," possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician port from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece. The port's name is a Gk. corruption of Phoenician Gebhal, lit. "frontier town" (cf. Heb. gebhul "frontier, boundary," Ar. jabal "mountain"). The Christian scripture was refered to in Gk. as Ta Biblia as early as c.223. Bible replaced O.E. biblioece "the Scriptures," from Gk. bibliotheke, lit. "book-repository" (from biblion + theke "case, chest, sheath"), used of the Bible by Jerome and the common L. word for it until Biblia began to displace it 9c. Figurative sense of "any authoritative book" is from 1804. Bible Belt first attested 1926, reputedly coined by H.L. Mencken.
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, the word bible[7] is from Anglo-Latin biblia, traced from the same word through Medieval Latin and Late Latin, as used in the phrase biblia sacra ("holy books"). This stemmed from the term (Greek: Ta biblia ta hagia, "the holy books"), which derived from biblion ("paper" or "scroll," the ordinary word for "book"), which was originally a diminutive of byblos ("Egyptian papyrus"), possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician port Byblos from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece.
Tie logic with the words "HOLY BOOKS" and it implies multiple authors. REFERENCES: Bible Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-26-2007 2:47 AM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
Re: More contradicton
Granny Magda,
Granny Magda writes:
I don't really see why. Tradition has held that the Pentateuch was written by Moses, as personally revealed to him by god. My post presented a logical argument that this could not be so, given the content, thus undermining the notion that the bible is the word of god.
Granny Magda writes: I find it hard to believe that people in this day and age still take the word of the bible as the word of god, via Moses. You do know that there are other scriptures in the Bible besides the Torah right?
The word "bible" however is singular and carries no such implication. Wrong.
The word Bible refers to the sacred canonical collection of religious writings of Judaism and Christianity. REF: Bible - Wikipedia
Thank you
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 55 of 309 (437342)
11-29-2007 6:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 52 by IamJoseph
11-29-2007 3:42 AM
|
|
Re: More contradicton
Joseph,
The semantics of the term HOLY BOOKS aside [all religions say that], is that all such holy books do not make any claims which impacts on science and ultimate questions; most holy books cannot even evidence history. Some mythical events come to mind when you claim that holy books do not make any claims which impact Science. They are: Moses departing the Red sea? The resurrection of Jesus Christ? Jesus walking on water? The Circle of the Earth? I am sure if I searched through the Bible or gave it some more thought I could come across more.
Genesis is a holy book to many people of numerous religious beliefs - but its connection with science is: this is also a book which is scientific, and one can say, the introduction of science. The book of Genesis is not "the introduction of Science" but it does defer us to an age when Science was perhaps applied to a degree.
Because here we find an orderly, sequenced and logical description of creation, which is a scientific premise even if it does not fully allign with all of science's understandings at this particular time.
Which description? The creation story in Genesis 1:1-31, 2:1-3, or the creation story in Genesis 2:4-25? In anycase, the creation stories in Genesis help us to understand what people of a different age thought of their particular origin.
Equally, there is no basis the OT was authored by many writers at different times: this is baseless and has not a shred of evidence, while contradicting its textual evidences: how can numerous writers, at different times, describe scientifically verified details and events 2000 years ago - including 1000s of names, dates and places - with the accuracy of the OT?
Perhaps we should PNT on this question. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given.
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 52 by IamJoseph, posted 11-29-2007 3:42 AM | | IamJoseph has not replied |
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
Re: More contradicton
Granny Magda, The word "Bible" is a noun although it does indicate that "holy books" or authortative documents are contained in it.
Lets not get bogged down in semantic squabbles.
As for your question, yes, funnily enough I am aware that there are many books in the Bible. Good.
You have chosen to ignore that point, as well as the point made before about Moses' death and instead choose to argue over my use of language. If you insist on bringing up every linguistic slip-up I make, we are never going to get to the point. I hope I have made my position reasonably clear.
I am trying to decipher the information you post which is why I asked the questions.
Do you believe that there is no contradiction in Moses describing himself as superlatively modest or writing of his own death?
There is nothing wrong with an author describing himself from a third person perspective. However, It is clear to me that the Torah has more than 1 author. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given. Edited by tthzr3, : No reason given.
Thank you
|
Force
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 58 of 309 (437361)
11-29-2007 7:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 57 by IamJoseph
11-29-2007 7:32 PM
|
|
Re: More contradicton
Joseph,
Moses did not write his own epitaph - Joshua did. This can be verified by examining the dates nominated for Moses' death and verses thereafter, and alligning it with the OT calendar. There are numerous such items which intitially cast a doubt, but become clarified upon better deliberation. The Bible can't prove the Bible to be true.
Thank you
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 57 by IamJoseph, posted 11-29-2007 7:32 PM | | IamJoseph has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2