The bible

[Tiffany_69]

Well

why is it in every hotel room you rent?

So you can prey that the escort you just call is not a B&S with her pimp ready to rob you

 

[JEFF247]

There are TONS of religions. So which one? Most treat women like second class citizens. I think if there was a god, he or she wouldn't want that. Sounds like a bunch of guys made them up for their own self promotion and needs.

 

[Mr. Lucky]

They did leave messages to go and HOBBY!

 

[WoodPeckr]

..... to illustrate the only important rule of any religion: Do unto others as you would like to have done to you.

All the religions have that 'rule' in them.

What's ironic is that "Do unto others as you would like to have done to you." Golden Rule, was first written by the pagan Greeks, them copied by all the religions that followed.....

 

[Cinema Face]

The bible is a collection of letters and memories of things that happened long after the fact. There was a convention in ROme I believe during the Roman Emporers times shortly after they had basically converted the empire to christianity that a bunch of people sat down and decided what the Christian faith actually was. ( part of this was described in the DaVinci files).

The original Bible probably represents the most accurate recollections of the people who wrote the books in it. How accurate they were and howmuch editing and artisitic creativity were put in to it over the years is up for debate. Remember it has been translated several times through several different languages. The Muslim Christian split changed thinngs as well.Every one of those would have had an effect on accuracy as well. Several reigning monarchs had there own version published think HenryVIII of England breaking with the Roman Catholic Church for personal reasons theology changed at that point as well.

All that said as an historically accurate document the bible ranks up there with greek mythology as a basis for a religion its held up well for a couple of thoussand years. As far as being simply mythology Schlieman found Troy about where the old Greeks said it would be.

Just to clarify:

It was the emperor Constantine that was the first Christian Roman emperor who declared Christianity to be the official religion of Rome. At the time, Christianity was already the dominant religion throughout the empire.

Constantine created the Council of Nicaea where much of details of the religion were decided such as the date of his birth, death and resurection. I heard theories that the concept of the virgin birth was created during this time. The early Christians regarded sex as something dirty. A virgin birth made Jesus seem more pure and devine.

Constantine commisioned the creation of the bible as we know it today. The chapters of the bible were written by the apostles within their lifetimes. Constantine had final say in which books and letters made it into the bible and which ones were ommitted.

What I find interesting is Constantine’s mother, Helina traveled to the holy land to determine the locations where the events of the bible took place. She was trying to find such places as where in Bethlehem was Jesus born, where he lived in Nazareth, which hill was he crucified, which garden did he pray, on which hill on the shore of the Gallalie did he feed the masses and so on. This was more than 300 years after the fact and nothing was written down. Helina had a “vision” from god which revealed those historic places. To this day, the locations that we take for granted are soley based on Helina’s vision or best guess, depending on your perspective.

What Christians take as fact are actually based on decisions and best guesses of these people.

 

[jwmorrice]

10% of those taking this poll think the bible is the literal word of god. Jeepers creepers, that's scary!

jwm

 

[JEFF247]

fiction!!

I’m not going to try to defend the bible. I’m just giving you something to think about.

Remember the story of Sodom and Gomorrah? I’ve always thought that was a pile of crap. God rains down fire and brimstone on 2 cities because they are being wicked.

I was really surprised to learn that they recently discovered the ruins of these two cities. They were exactly where the bible says they were. They were under about 2 meters of ash and sulfur (brimstone) and they were destroyed about the same time the bible says they were.

I’m not saying the bible is true word for word but when I learned of the archeological evidence to support the story that I thought was fiction, I gained a little more respect for the bible.


http://www.arkdiscovery.com/sodom_&_gomorrah.htm

http://www.bibleplus.org/discoveries/sodomfound.htm

There's some truth in it. I am sure there are a few ancient cities that are mentioned in the bible that really exist, but anything beyond that is a fairy tale. Sorry.

 

[ROGER O. THORNHILL]

Some Good, Some Bad

The obvious reason is that it is the cheapest and easily
the single most widely read book in the world. Considering that the
book is revered by not only christians of all affiliations but a large part of it
(the part that belongs to Judaism) is also regarded as divinely inspired by the
Muslim. Leaving a copy of the Holy Bible near the bedside is not
likely going to disturb anyone from around the world
except the most militant atheists which probably represent no more than 1% of humanity.

Having said that I suspect that the Bible was chosen
as the book in hotel rooms because of the naughty
things in the chapter of 'Song of Solomon'. Being
a gentleman I would vehemently avoid reading certain
passages from that chapter before a lady. On second thought
a copy of selections from that chapter exclusively reserved for
rooms during a multi-hour outcall session could be appropriate.
After years of studying the holy book I still get a hard-on
reading those passages.

On the contrary my friend, most of the writings in the "Song of Solomon" is considered by many to be some of the first original poetry. It is written beautifully with some stunning romantic imagery. In fact, I have quoted some of it in cards and letters to previous ex-es and it has always gotten me the reaction I expected. From tears and ultra-attention to fabulous sex. You tell any woman that "she has honey under her tongue" and you will have a very good evening. Yes Sir.

As far as the entire bible goes, it is basically an instruction booklet. It has been edited, re-edited, bastardized, compromised, abused and abducted by whatever political cause it served to the regime of the day. If you want socio-political control over a population, then tell your public you are following the Divine Word of God and that ye shall follow lest you wind up in Hell!

The best way way to manipulate people is to tell them their soul will be dammed if they don't follow suit.

The other side of the coin has us learning basic fundamentals such as "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" and so forth. The Golden Rule will always apply as much as the Sermon on the Mount. Timeless wise words that will always have their place. Still, we don't need the Bible to be the only source of these teachings. A fundamental good human heart will always know what to do. The Bible is just a place to begin but it is not the "be all and end all" of all beliefs. Take the good from it, chuck the rest of the bullshit in it and live a good life.

 

[Hadrian]

Which part the killing or where the "messiah" tells everyone they burn for eternity unless they do what his book says?

A rediculous story subjugating men to the role of sheep.

We are all gods!

 

[Aardvark154]

Your guide to things biblical has a very impressive pedigree. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Wyatt

jwm

The whole Syro-Palestinian Archaeology/Biblical Archaeology dispute is not only probably the fiercest in the discipline. But also has the most partisan supporters.

Merely because Ron Wyatt was a charlatan doesn't mean that archaeology provides no "proof" of biblical events not even the most hardcore member of the Syro-Palestinian School to the best of my knowledge alleges that.

 

[Aardvark154]

The bible is a collection of letters and memories of things that happened long after the fact. There was a convention in ROme I believe during the Roman Emporers times shortly after they had basically converted the empire to christianity that a bunch of people sat down and decided what the Christian faith actually was. ( part of this was described in the DaVinci files).

The original Bible probably represents the most accurate recollections of the people who wrote the books in it. How accurate they were and howmuch editing and artisitic creativity were put in to it over the years is up for debate. Remember it has been translated several times through several different languages. The Muslim Christian split changed thinngs as well.Every one of those would have had an effect on accuracy as well. Several reigning monarchs had there own version published think HenryVIII of England breaking with the Roman Catholic Church for personal reasons theology changed at that point as well.

All that said as an historically accurate document the bible ranks up there with greek mythology as a basis for a religion its held up well for a couple of thoussand years. As far as being simply mythology Schlieman found Troy about where the old Greeks said it would be.

The New Testiment most certainly was not written "long after the fact" The Gospel according to Saint Mark was written in its current form about thirty years after the crucifixion of Christ, and most scholars believe was based on the even earlier Q source. While the first of the Pauline Epistles date from at least a decade earlier.

The ordering of the Canonical Gospels certainly dates as early as 160 A.D. while by the early 200s the church in Alexandria was using the same twenty-seven books that are still in the New Testament however there remained controversy over five books, most notably the Revelation of John. As a reminder Christianity wasn’t official tolerated under the Emperor Constantine the Great until 313 A.D.

Now it is true that the first General or Ecumenical Council wasn't held until 325 (the First Council of Nicæa), however it would have been rather stupid to hold one before when everyone could have been arrested and executed.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "Muslim (sic) Christian split" although it is true that "critical analysis" (i.e. in the meaning of textual analysis not of “hostile") shows that Mohamed was reacting to Christianity particularly Eutychianism which had spread into Arabia in some passages in the Koran.

 

[Aardvark154]

I’m certainly not surprised at the results of this unscientific poll, after all a website devoted to escorts and strip clubs in the Greater Golden Horseshoe isn’t likely to be a hotbed of traditional values. However, it should be mentioned that this TERB poll very much flies in the face of every professional poll done on this subject in the past decade in the U.S. and Canada.

I do, however, find that there is a lot of ignorance, masquerading as knowledge. I know that there is going to be lots of grumbling and upset at my making that statement, but it seems that a number of posts indicate about as much knowledge of (and interest in) Theology, as I have in “cold starting” a nuclear accelerator. (A harsh statement I know, but I’m not sure how to phrase it more delicately).

And yes, I'm like Saint Augustine of Hippo "Lord, make me chaste - but not yet. . ."

 

[amber-jade]

10% of those taking this poll think the bible is the literal word of god. Jeepers creepers, that's scary!

jwm

no kidding..

i thought we stopped believing this crap when humans where still swinging from tree's..




.

 

[oil&gas]

The whole Syro-Palestinian Archaeology/Biblical Archaeology dispute is not only probably the fiercest in the discipline. But also has the most partisan supporters.

Merely because Ron Wyatt was a charlatan doesn't mean that archaeology provides no "proof" of biblical events not even the most hardcore member of the Syro-Palestinian School to the best of my knowledge alleges that.

Even as a non-believer I have no problem accepting the
old-testament as one valuable source of the history of Israel. So
I am not surprised to learn of any archaeological evidences of
biblical events. I am not skeptical about events such as those of
the conflicts between Israel and the Philistines ever taking place.
I just don't believe that history/archaeology ever provide any convincing
evidences of the involvement of Yahweh in all those events
as described in the Bible.

 

[Aardvark154]

Even as a non-believer I have no problem accepting the
old-testament as one valuable source of the history of Israel. So
I am not surprised to learn of any archaeological evidences of
biblical events. I am not skeptical about events such as those of
the conflicts between Israel and the Philistines ever taking place.
I just don't believe that history/archaeology ever provide any convincing
evidences of the involvement of Yahweh in all those events
as described in the Bible.

Needless to say expecting archæology to "prove" what is a matter of faith is asinine or as close to it as to make no mind. But among the things the discipline can do is to show whether historical discriptions in the Bible, are supported by the archæological record.

 

[herames]

I like to believe tha bible is a Copy of a copy of a copy of some wrote some 2000 years ago...but this says is best>>>

COPYRIGHT 2004 American Atheists Inc.

Religion was not definitively disproved until the eighteenth century, when scholars began subjecting the Judaeo-Christian bible to critical analysis. With the discovery that the Bible endorsed a flat earth, solid crystal skies, and a multiplicity of gods and goddesses, Jewish and non-Jewish, and that the earliest biblical authors had no belief in human 'souls' that outlived the death of the body, religion was as permanently discredited as an immobile earth at the center of the universe. Prior to that time, some of humankind's greatest scientists had been godworshippers. Newton and Galileo come to mind. But with the discovery that religion did not have to be merely disbelieved, but had actually been disproved, it became impossible for any sane, intelligent, educated person on this planet to be a godworshipper. That situation continues in effect.

Anyone can be a godworshipper out of simple ignorance. The author and most nontheists with whom he is familiar only abandoned religion as a consequence of education. Is it possible for a sane student to learn the origins of modern religion, and continue to believe that fifty virgin-born resurrected saviors who preceded Jesus were all fairy tales, but the final copy of a copy of a copy was a fact of history? Certainly not for anyone who has the capacity for logical reasoning that is commonly termed intelligence.

It is no coincidence that the four...

 

[Anynym]

I, too, am very concerned by the amount of ignorance masquerading as wisdom, and the volume of intolerance and hatred which has been expressed.

People who wouldn't think themselves qualified mathematicians or artists because they took one or two introductory classes in high school think they know what they're talking about because they sat in (and obviously didn't pay much attention to) a class or two on religion.

Thousands spend their whole lives studying the questions, and still don't get it right. Yet, millions don't study at all and think they know everything. Or simply choose to ignore what they have learned because it's convenient for them. Troubling, indeed.

 

[capncrunch]

Thousands spend their whole lives studying the questions, and still don't get it right.

How would anyone know what's right and what isn't? Since it's all based on untestable faith, there's no "right" standard by which to measure it.

 

[gramage]

How would anyone know what's right and what isn't? Since it's all based on untestable faith, there's no "right" standard by which to measure it.

I agree with this. Noone knows what happens. That fact is why I object so much to religion, which tells you they know what happens when you die and (about many issues) how you are supposed to live your life.

Whether god exists is an open question (I consider myself 55-45 in favour of not, but thats purely a hunch) and it is a completely seperate question from is religion true.

 

[a 1 player]

What is your belief about the bible?

In an age when there was a huge amount of illiteracy, a short lifespan, slavery, tribal societies, almost no knowledge of math, science or philosophy, the bible did a pretty good job of trying to show good and moral behavior through parables.

That time is long gone.