It just goes to show that rather than being written by a god the bible was written by semi illiterate goat herders, why anyone should think it has any other significance is beyond me.
Well, it's written pretty impressively. Some education instustitions start using it as early as high school and call it advanced placement course since it is one piece of fine literature with symbolism, similes, metaphors, imagery, etc. At least started so in my high school. So that's pretty impressive. Also that this book in ols testament said the sun, moon, and earth were round to imply they were similar in shape was impressive. And as another user said science says a nova will destroy earth and old testament since earth will be destroyed as well and so on. And that bible also says invisible particles exist like protons, neutrons, and elections is quite impressive along with an invisible foundation that's keeping earth there on gravity is amazing. This is one very highly important book written by "semi illiterate goat herders," don't you think? I sure haven't found one semi semi semi as close.
Well I suggest you start with the Histories and then move on to the Republic, both of which are far more informative. The are many eastern writings which pre date the bible such as the writings of Confucius. Sadly many greek texts were destroyed by the Christian Barbarians, whilst others were only saved because they were translated into Arabic by Islamic scholars. Christians destroyed much that they considered heretical to the goat herder religion.
The ancients were not sitting in a rocket ship. When the OT was begun the Hebrews were captives in Babylon. They adopted some of the Babylonian beliefs. One of those was a flat earth with a dome over it. In the British Museum there is a clay tablet dated circa 600BCE which shows a flat earth with Babylon at its centre. Another Babylonian belief they took up was Monotheism. Before that, despite what you may want to believe, history and archaeology show the Hebrews had many gods. For all your 'knowledge' you know little about the ancient world. You're simply using modern thinking to interpret something you know nothing about.
Reference would be appreciated - and please don't quote Hebrews 11:3 as the Bible's revelation of Atoms. The idea of atoms had been around for 400 years. 'The universe is composed of two elements: the atoms and the void in which they exist and move.” According to Democritus atoms were miniscule quantities of matter. Democritus hypothesized that atoms cannot be destroyed, differ in size, shape and temperature, are always moving, and are invisible. He believed that there are an infinite number of atoms. This hypothesis was created in 465BC. So nothing new then.
The problem is that, when it comes to Biblical hermeneutics, this devolves into cherry picking. Worse, it is cherry picking that is only applied retroactively. Bible-believers make it up as they go along and declare some parts symbolic and some parts literal after the fact. This is why there is no record of any Christians saying that the Bible says the earth is a sphere until well after science discovered this fact. There is no book I treat this way and no person who is being honest with themselves should ever treat any book this way. All books get some things wrong and most manage to get a few things right. So the intellectually honest thing to do is to treat all books as fallible. Retroactively changing the meaning of the text to fit the facts and then pretending that's what the book meant all along is the reflects the opposite strategy.
There is nothing "fair" about Biblical hermeneutics. It starts from the assumption that the Bible is always right and then retroactively reinterprets anything that ends up being wrong while pretending there is something remarkable about anything it gets right. Again, you could do the same thing with any religion. If you were to apply this method "fairly," you'd have to believe literally every religion is true.
Just to continue on with your line if thinking. Even the God of the Bible is not infallible as is stated by the God of Genesis. I find it strange that most of the things people believe about God and the Devil (supposedly based on the Bible) are refuted by the Bible ?!. Consider Genesis 6 So here we have God regretting his mistake (creating a being whose every inclination and thought was only evil all the time - LOL ...and what a mistake - surely an amature demi God could have done a better job than this ... a being whose "ONLY" inclination and thought was evil all the time) God is presented as fallable .. full stop. Further - the authors do this intentionally as I will get to later. The second fallibility in this passage is God's decision to save Noah, his sons and the wives. Clearly if the human heart is Only evil all of the time ... then the offspring that come out of Gods decision to let humans live is going to result in the same "evil" that he is presently planning to destroy. If God has had this change of heart (no longer minds the evil) then why does he follow through on killing all humans except Noah and family ? Clearly if God can not get this far in the logical process .. this does not bode well for infallibility, "all knowing, all wise" and so on. The fact of the matter is that the ancients (be it in the time of Abraham or the Israelite's during the time of Moses) did not believe that God was infallible. The God of Abraham was "El - Enlil" Chief God of the Sumerian Pantheon. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abraham Its a bit long so scroll to "Genesis in light of recent scholarship" The God of Moses "YHWH" was believed to be a one of El's son's - As per Deuteronomy 32 http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DT32BibSac.pdf The ancients and the Israelite's were monotheists in that they worshiped only one god but they believed that many God's existed. They believed that many God's existed and that these God's were not perfect. Many - like YHWH for example are depicted with the most petty and nasty of human characteristic "I am a Jealous God" ... God is depicted as a xenophobic flip flopping God and a genocidal maniac. God makes a law stating that children should not be punished for the sins of their parents (Good law !! part of the Rule of Law even today) God then turns around and tells the Israelite's to kill children and babies - because of the sins of their parents. Not sure who the God of Jesus is but, it is certainly not this YHWH fellow. "Stone the Adulterer ..Kill the Gays ... Kill Babies for the sins of their parents" is replaced with ... Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone, Judge not lest you be judged, Love neighbor as thyself.
The Qur'an is essentially one gigantic poem written in a language that is widely used today. Plus, it also includes symbolism, similes, metaphors, and imagery. Does that suggest we should all consider converting to Islam? Besides being taught the Bible, were you also taught the Qur'an, the works of Plato, Confucius, and the vast works of other philosophers through the ages so you would have something to compare to? Or, were you left to believe that the Bible is unique in some respect?
Why? This isn't an interesting subject to read about for me and since it's controversial it's best to just agree to disagree. And darn them for destroying what isn't theirs.
I never said ancients. I was talking in present tense. Facepalm Once again you're mentioning one belief of the two. Back then people had 2 beliefs, round and flat. People were always divided since no one knew anything. What? Judaism believed in one God. They're monotheistic. What religion are you talking about?
God’s existence and God’s revelations to mankind does not live or die on the Bible, nor on your preferred interpretations. But that is the comfort zone the unbeliever often seeks. If the unbeliever can find incongruences or alleged contradictions (again, based on their preferred meaning of the passage) then they can relax and say “no reasonable evidence for any God once again.” Of course this is pretty base and incomplete. God has revealed His True self in many manifestations and reasons that transcend Scripture. But man will never come to that belief or understanding so long as his desire is to not want to know. And I submit most intelligent people who doubt God’s reality do not want to know if it is true or not, so they can have some excuse to pursue their paths of pleasure and comfort with hopeful impunity.
By 600 BC it was widely accepted the earth was a sphere. Old wives tale about ancients not understanding simple geometry and all.
Reference? About invisible things and gravity? One would be Job 38. 4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? (Earth was put in place to not fall since a verse I mentioned before said earth was hung on nothing so gravity is the foundation to keep it there. Gravity is the invisible part in this case since verse asks where it is? We can't see the gravity foundation to answer where it is. We see earth on nothing as my verse before this mentioned it) Tell Me, if you have understanding. (As I said we can't see gravity to understand how to make this foundation that the earth has that's unseen) 5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! (Asks if we know measurements of what was created. Obviously they didn't know the measurements then. ) Or who stretched the line upon it? (The equator that was put on earth. Another invisible thing) 6 To what were its foundations fastened? (How was the line tied exactly or earth tied to the foundation it asks? Since it wasn't tied so no one could answer this either) This is lame though. Why are we discussing a book you don't believe in?
Make what up? Our verses don't change with time at all. At good texts make things symbolic and not symbolic. Bible makes tons of parables and connections and whatnot. It's just part of writing, and that's actually labeled as good writing. Point is bible isn't for all to understand. Best to drop it if not interested. I personally don't bother other religions. I care not for their written doctrines to even mention anything at all. When they talk I laugh to myself and move on. I don't like to waste my time on uselessness.
Regret has several definitions. The one you're looking for is the word "disappointed." No stop needed. I'm disappointed in people daily myself. It's part of life. Trinity. Jesus was the transition from Judaism to Christianity. Same God but a transition. Hebrews 8:13. By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear. No more old testament or Judaism but now Christianity and New Testament. I don't know why you bother with this though. If something is pointless to me I am not even in that discussion.
If Islam is what you believe to be true then go for it. A religion is a belief in something not a belief in what has symbolism, similes, metaphors, etc. It's about what the belief says not its fancy or unfancy way of saying it. Plato and Socrates are my favorite philosophers. But what about them? They offer me nothing beyond this life as does the bible. And what about the Qur'an or something else? It has no value to me. A person will develop their own opinion and beliefs. No one person in the world will even have 100% identical belief in any one thing as long as different varieties of something exist be it color or shape or whatever. And for me no other religious doctrine does anything for me to give it value or even any thought.
This is invalid. No single person can believe every religion is true. Religions contradict each other as do opinions and views. A person will always choose one that makes more sense to them. It also doesn't start with the assumption that something is right. When a person makes their opinion or view or whatever they think it through and then decide what they believe is true.
Then your methodology is invalid. If we applied it to all religions, we'd have to believe all religions. That was the point. Yes, you are starting with the assumption that your religion is right and then trying to rewrite your religious text in retrospect to make it so. Your opinion and view should come from observation, but you do it the other way around. You decide what you want the truth to be and then reinterpret your texts to make it fit the observations.
So you believe what you WANT to be true, not what the evidence leads to. Which is intellectually dishonest.
The verses change all the time. Every day. With every believer. They are constantly rewritten and reinterpreted to fit the facts. Then the excuse is that only believers have the secret decoder ring (even though not even all believers agree on the reading). Even on this forum, we've heard dozens of different excuses and rewritten explanations for why God ordered infanticide in 1 Samuel 15. You tried claiming that neon on the moon explains why the Bible says that the moon is a source of light . . . forgetting the fact that neon doesn't glow or produce light on its own. The neon on the moon doesn't produce light any more than the neon in our own planet's atmosphere produces light. The neon in the signs you are thinking of (though thanks for the reminder of my favorite Brooks and Dunn song) requires electricity to turn it into a plasma. It doesn't naturally produce light. The neon on the Moon doesn't produce light; the moon doesn't produce light. It reflects light. But that's how you reinterpreted reality and the Bible in order to make it all fit, because you had already decided the Bible is right and you are changing the facts to make it fit your assumption.
Yup, that's the thought process of people who think that desire is a replacement for evidence. Doesn't matter where the evidence leads. Just believe what you hope is true. Might as well believe I have a billion dollars in my bank account. I WANT that to be true, so who cares about the facts to the contrary.
But all religions do not state the same thing and contradict each other. So believing in all religions at the same time makes no sense. I don't rewrite the bible only quote it, what? Rewriting a doctrine is retarded actually and if one doctrine is changed than all the more reason for me not to believe in it.
