Enlightened Biblical criticism.

Debunker said:

I could point out a number of dishonest statements you make but the one to be pointed out here is so semantically slick, I can not help but emphasize it above all other slight of hand efforts you make to abolish God from the Bible.

Click to expand...

It always troubles me when anyone declares others as liars and their words as lies because it demonstrates a weakness within your self and not in me.

Jesus said: "Out of the heart the mouth speaks" which goes for Internet forum postings too, and it means that even when a person does lie then their heart is wishing the words were true. This is why dishonesty and telling lies hurts the liar more so then the lie harms anyone lied to.

As such it is virtuous to not only be honest one-self but to always believe what others say because each person's own words are our own condemnation or our praise.
Even when we know the words to be dishonest it is the virtue to respond as in belief of the words because that damns the lie into the liar.

Debunker said:

Here it isI

Click to expand...

It was another poster and their website link which said that God and the Bible condones such things and not I. In fact I say the Bible and God does not condone such evil violent crimes.

Debunker said:

See! You equate God with the Bible. If you discredit the Bible, you assume God is discredited. You might say that is not what you were saying but it is in fact what you did say. If you did not mean to say this and the fact that you did say it, proves that you have given very little logical or philosophical consideration to your particular brand of Christianity.

Click to expand...

I do believe most of humanity equate God with the Bible as even Atheist see it as such an equation and they reject both.

I myself like the Bible even though parts of it is twisted and or untrue, but "God" is not inside the Bible.

Debunker said:

Just what is your world view? We need to know this before we can judge what you say to see if it offers anything of value. Do you accept the dabar or logos world view that the Bible teaches?

Click to expand...

I have no idea of what is my world view, and I truly doubt that I would share the world view that people take out of the Bible.

As to the "dabar or logos" then I understand them to mean the "spokesperson" or "speaker" as Jesus the logos is the spokesperson for the Father (God).

Debunker said:

Are you a materialist? Are you an atheist, humanist, or just what is your world view? You speak of a higher power, what is that in your world view? Tell us something about what you think is really real or are you trying to dupe us into some crazy new philosophy? If you do not trust the Bible, what do you trust? In other words, what is your epistemology? Communist, atheist, humanist do not have an ontological world view, do they?

Click to expand...

I adhere to all while being a member to none.

So yes I am a materialist and an Atheist, a Theist, humanist, Communist, Democrat, and all religions including Islam, Buddhist, Hindu, Shaman, Wiccan, and all others.

In this claim I am very sincere as I find God all through the entire of humanity and beyond.

Debunker said:

Now, I will go ahead and apologize for being dogmatic and difficult with you but remember you have set yourself as a critic of the most revered book in the world. You say you are doing your criticism with science. Your world view will tell us what we need to know about your logic and science. Your science may be more superstitious than any world view known to man. We have a right to know.

Click to expand...

I do not object to you or anyone being dogmatic as I respect that, but I do not share your dogmas.

Debunker said:

By the way, the bible does not condone those things that you point out as being evil. It does record an accurate history of evil as well as good. You do twist things, why?

Click to expand...

It is necessary to twist as in un-twisting because people and doctrines are twisted and wrong so I try my part in un-twist-ing them.

Know it all. said:

I just ask people like your self to let it go and so be it.

If you reject the Biblical Criticism then that is fine by me, but I want to discuss the subject and that is the point of this thread.

I often find this kind of feedback that know-it-all Christians simply want to drop the subject and bully anyone that tries to discuss it and pretend that there are no other sides to the story when there are.

You keep calling me and this as "humanism" or humanist and so what? as are not a humanist discussion to be respected?

I am happy to say that I really do reject the orthodox claims to spirituality because Jesus was a Man and not a spirit, and the real "God" is a practical and realistic entity and not some magical spirit which can not be studied or exposed.

Biblical Criticism opens the door to so much more.

:sorry1:

Click to expand...

No body here rejects Biblical criticism. Respectively, you have not been bullied. I only explore the premises of your accusations which is part of a fair discussion. I see that you want to reform the entire education of religion in the schools. don't you think I have a right to explore your philosophical background if you think your work is that important?

You keep calling me and this as "humanism" or humanist and so what? as are not a humanist discussion to be respected?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yes, of course! But you must be able to defend your claims and you must be willing to state the whole truth. Otherwise your point of view deserves no respect whatsoever from truth seekers.

I often find this kind of feedback that know-it-all Christians simply want to drop the subject and bully anyone that tries to discuss it and pretend that there are no other sides to the story when there are.

Click to expand...

Well, who is the one here that wants to drop the subject? I am a fundamentalist Bible thumping conservative that is willing to discuss ontology with you. Really, you do speak down to Christians when you denounce spirituality without foundation to do so. but look, you did recognize a "higher power" and unless you do believe, whatever you are saying, please refute the fact that you made such a declaration. I don't believe anybody bullied you into saying that, did they? You live in the real world, you said, and you are a realist, right? A realist that gets upset when challenged, is not the person that needs to be a major critic of God (Bible). You will lose that argument.

It is a valid biblical doctrine that God is a Spirit. Use your critical skills to denounce that and don't just try to blow us off with your anti Christian rhetoric. If you can make your criticism stick, we will follow you. You do have an ontology (higher power) so tell us how you arrived at the epistemology you are spouting. Please don't get upset with me yet. My intentions are good.

and the real "God" is a practical and realistic entity and not some magical spirit which can not be studied or exposed.

Click to expand...

Tell us about your real God so we can worship him. Has He existed foe ever? Did you create the realistic entity? My God is a Spirit but your God is a peace of matter, right, or what is he since he is realistic more so than my God of the Bible? You did say your God could be studied and exposed, did you not or do you take that back? If not , tell us more about your God?

micrurus said:

... examples of how god condomes slavery, murder and rape... I just cannot even understand how some one would even atempt to justifie them all.

Click to expand...

The Bible is a translation and the King James Version was written in 1611 C.E. when slavery had a far different meaning then what the Bible was saying.

The word for slave would be better translated as worker or employee or subordinate or servant which does not mean "slave" as us Caucasians defined the word. An example of this is that history claimed the Pyramids of old Egypt were built with slave labor and now finally we learn that the Pyramids were built by employees and professionals of that time.

As to murder then the famous commandment of "Thou shalt not kill." is a wrong interpretation and it is correctly translated as "Thou shalt not murder." and in fact there is a big difference between "kill and murder". As in killing a criminal in a legal execution is not considered as murder, and killing in war is not seen as murder, so the words do need to be correctly interpreted.

The reality is that God can not break His own commands, so when people are determined to live violently, as when God told Abraham not to kill Isaac then Abraham could have chosen to obey or disobey and we today can chose too.

Animal sacrifices seem barbaric to me but before then people would eat animals raw, so the sacrifice rituals taught the people the art of cleaning and of cooking the meat which means that God used the sacrifice as a tool to improve the ignorance of the people.

The discipline of Biblical Criticism works.

micrurus said:

and there is also a page that give ALOT of contradictions in the bible.

Click to expand...

I find the only contradictions to be contradicting the orthodox religion doctrines.

As like Jesus and God said to "love thy enemies" but religions teach a contradiction of a burning hell, so that contradiction is with people and not with God nor with the Bible when correctly criticized.

Know it all. said:

So you and I disagree on this one.

Of course when I become the absolute dictator of the entire planet earth THEN we will start doing things my way.

:thud:

Click to expand...

You are too late! God already assigned that job to me!

Know it all. said:

The science of Biblical Criticism shows Jesus (Yesu) to have been a real life person instead of some mystical magical God-man.

Click to expand...

Biblical criticism is not a science. It does use rigourous methodologies, criteria, etc., but as with history, we can't perform experiments in the way required by the scientific method.

Additionally, biblical criticism can't possibly "show" that Jesus wasn't god, because most scholars take as a starting premise that miracles and the like must be excluded from the realm of probability.

Know it all. said:

It always troubles me when anyone declares others as liars and their words as lies because it demonstrates a weakness within your self and not in me.

Jesus said: "Out of the heart the mouth speaks" which goes for Internet forum postings too, and it means that even when a person does lie then their heart is wishing the words were true. This is why dishonesty and telling lies hurts the liar more so then the lie harms anyone lied to.

As such it is virtuous to not only be honest one-self but to always believe what others say because each person's own words are our own condemnation or our praise.
Even when we know the words to be dishonest it is the virtue to respond as in belief of the words because that damns the lie into the liar.
It was another poster and their website link which said that God and the Bible condones such things and not I. In fact I say the Bible and God does not condone such evil violent crimes.
I do believe most of humanity equate God with the Bible as even Atheist see it as such an equation and they reject both.

I myself like the Bible even though parts of it is twisted and or untrue, but "God" is not inside the Bible.

I have no idea of what is my world view, and I truly doubt that I would share the world view that people take out of the Bible.

As to the "dabar or logos" then I understand them to mean the "spokesperson" or "speaker" as Jesus the logos is the spokesperson for the Father (God).
I adhere to all while being a member to none.

So yes I am a materialist and an Atheist, a Theist, humanist, Communist, Democrat, and all religions including Islam, Buddhist, Hindu, Shaman, Wiccan, and all others.

In this claim I am very sincere as I find God all through the entire of humanity and beyond.

I do not object to you or anyone being dogmatic as I respect that, but I do not share your dogmas.
It is necessary to twist as in un-twisting because people and doctrines are twisted and wrong so I try my part in un-twist-ing the

Click to expand...

See now, Know It All, we know more about you then before. You do have an ontology but you do not know what it is. You want to lead all the misinformed Christians out of confusion but what the world view that you want to take them, you have no idea what world view it is. You just want to debunk their world view. That is the Debunker's job. My job is to help you see the truth and although I speak the truth, I am not the dabar/logos. You do not understand these terms. You need to Google these words and study the entomology and derivations of these words, if you intend to publish as a critic of the authenticity of the Bible.

You also need to study the Bible's take on lying. Godd trick! You know that I did not disrespect you by calling you a liar. Why do you accuse me of this? That is not my style. You, however, prove me correct in assessing your evaluating skills with your own words. All the scripture verses you tried to apply to me actually condemns you. If you think I am lying or being dishonest, I invite you, cough it up. I welcome the discussion. I will continue to point out where you intellectually, of course, are very dishonest person. I do not venture to scorn your chacter. You are not a liar in this respect but in the fact you are not able to rationally defend or explain your authority for knowledge, proves my point.

Yes, we can agree that we both speak from the heart either good or evil. It will be a contest from here as to whom speaks the truth. All we can do is spout the truth as we know it and see who wins. You will get your truth"through mankind" and I will receive my truth from dabar. Let's stay away from name calling and personal attacks. Be as sarcastic as you want but just be intellectually honest in you dogma.

Know it all. said:

The Bible is a translation and the King James Version was written in 1611 C.E. when slavery had a far different meaning then what the Bible was saying.(We had and still have the Hebrew and Greek text of the Bible. Why not refer to these. I understand though, if the Kings James version was good for Paul and Peter, it is good enough for me.)

The word for slave would be better translated as worker or employee or subordinate or servant which does not mean "slave" as us Caucasians defined the word. An example of this is that history claimed the Pyramids of old Egypt were built with slave labor and now finally we learn that the Pyramids were built by employees and professionals of that time.(That is the same take all slave owners have always had. That is not a new interpretation. I would like a reference on the Egyptian slave since the common labor was most certainly a slave. The skilled craftsman was probably hired.)

As to murder then the famous commandment of "Thou shalt not kill." is a wrong interpretation and it is correctly translated as "Thou shalt not murder." and in fact there is a big difference between "kill and murder". As in killing a criminal in a legal execution is not considered as murder, and killing in war is not seen as murder, so the words do need to be correctly interpreted.(No person I have ever known interpreted it any differently)

The reality is that God can not break His own commands, so when people are determined to live violently, as when God told Abraham not to kill Isaac then Abraham could have chosen to obey or disobey and we today can chose too.

Animal sacrifices seem barbaric to me but before then people would eat animals raw, so the sacrifice rituals taught the people the art of cleaning and of cooking the meat which means that God used the sacrifice as a tool to improve the ignorance of the people.

The discipline of Biblical Criticism works.

I find the only contradictions to be contradicting the orthodox religion doctrines.

As like Jesus and God said to "love thy enemies" but religions teach a contradiction of a burning hell, so that contradiction is with people and not with God nor with the Bible when correctly criticized.

Click to expand...

You continue to praise your particular brand of Biblical criticism. We know and agree that the meaning of the scriptures should and can be debated. But this must be done by the use of the facts.

You can not just be allowed to make up facts or anthropological knowledge and apply it to the Bible. If you make up facts to support your opinions in one place, you can not be trusted to stick to the facts through out the discussion.

For example, you say "Animal sacrifices seem barbaric to me but before then people would eat animals raw...," well maybe a few did as thy do still eat steaks rare but many people who knew the value of fire cooked their meat well done. You simply made this fact up. That is intellectually dishonest. That might have been a good affect on sacrificed meat but the main purpose of the sacrifice was to be bring us to Christ. That is the theological meaning of the sacrifice.

Also, you mistake clarification as a criticism. It is not.

Oberon said:

Biblical criticism is not a science. It does use rigourous methodologies, criteria, etc., but as with history, we can't perform experiments in the way required by the scientific method.

Click to expand...

In some ways you are correct but technically it can be categorized as a science, Link definition HERE .

Oberon said:

Additionally, biblical criticism can't possibly "show" that Jesus wasn't god, because most scholars take as a starting premise that miracles and the like must be excluded from the realm of probability.

Click to expand...

My finding is that religious people define "miracle" incorrectly and Biblical Criticism defines a miracle in realistic terms which make the criticism more accurate then the religious faith.

As like having a baby is a miracle, but some people see it simply as a biological process which can be duplicated in a test tube. So just because it can be explained and duplicated does not change a miracle into a non-miracle. Flying an aircraft is a type of miracle just as the Big-Bang is a miraculous creation day.

The religious claim that a miracle must be like magic and a baby must be spiritually conceived, or the universe must pop into existence like magic or mysticism is just a backward perception.

As like in science fiction then people can travel back in time to become Jesus, so some person from the future like a Mr Spock or Doctor McCoy or even a future Neil Armstrong could go back in time with levitation boots to walk on water and fancy medical so they can cure leprosy and cure the blind and do medical miracles and call them-self as Jesus because those kind of futuristic miracles are easy to believe, and most people (Atheist or lacking faith) just claim Jesus did no such things. A future person could go back in time to be Jesus but Jesus Himself could not do such things.

So the point is that the miracles are real as Biblical Criticism declares, and the miracles being like magic as the orthodox claim is not real.

The evidence given by science that the earth floats perfectly in empty space with invisible forces controlling everything is by far more fantastic of a miracle then anything written in the scriptures.

Real miracles are not magic.

:angel2:

Debunker said:

I would like a reference on the Egyptian slave since the common labor was most certainly a slave.

Click to expand...

Here are two of many links that declare the Pyramids were NOT built by slaves:

1) Social Studies - Pyramids Not Built by Slaves, Egypt Says

2) BBC News - Egypt tombs suggest free men built pyramids, not slaves

And my real point was that the word "slave" is mistranslated in the King James version (KJV) of the Bible because the scripture is correctly referring to workers as paid servants and employees.

Know it all. said:

Here are two of many links that declare the Pyramids were NOT built by slaves:

1) Social Studies - Pyramids Not Built by Slaves, Egypt Says

2) BBC News - Egypt tombs suggest free men built pyramids, not slaves

And my real point was that the word "slave" is mistranslated in the King James version (KJV) of the Bible because the scripture is correctly referring to workers as paid servants and employees.

Click to expand...

You have not provided enough evidence to prove the point of your thread. Do you not agree with that? You fail to explain how the major theme of the Bible is in error and I suggest that you can not identify the one most basic theme of the Bible. Please explain what mistakes in the Scriptures prevent people from identifying this major theme and explain how reality is different than perceived to be. If you can do this small task, then I will admit that your criticisms have some merit.

Debunker said:

You have not provided enough evidence to prove the point of your thread. Do you not agree with that?

Click to expand...

Of course I agree because I am not trying to prove any point.

All I wanted from this thread is to discuss the merits of Biblical Criticism, and there is no point of mine to prove.

Debunker said:

You fail to explain how the major theme of the Bible is in error ...

Click to expand...

I do not claim the major themes of the Bible are wrong even if some orthodox doctrine might appear to be challenged by the revelations of Biblical Criticism.

Debunker said:

... and I suggest that you can not identify the one most basic theme of the Bible.

Click to expand...

The most basic theme is told by Jesus in the link text here = Matthew 22:36-40 - Passage*Lookup - King James Version - BibleGateway.com = first love God / second love neighbor / which hangs all the law and prophets.

And I say very many people including Christians do miss this theme.

Debunker said:

Please explain what mistakes in the Scriptures prevent people from identifying this major theme and explain how reality is different than perceived to be.

Click to expand...

I would refer you back to my posting #10 of this thread and my post #3 as me giving rather explicit examples.

Debunker said:

If you can do this small task, then I will admit that your criticisms have some merit.

Click to expand...

It appears obvious to me that you are intending to hijack my thread here and railroad the discussion away from the subject, but it also apparent to me that no one else is willing or else knowledgeable to discuss this subject with me so I say go ahead and hijack and railroad ahead.

This is not new to me as I have told already on my introduction thread, HERE, that I do have years of past experience on Internet forums and I have decades researching religions, so it would have been a far greater surprise if there were some knowledgeable conversations about the subject here or anywhere.

And as I said in the 1st post of this thread - it is hard to find books and info concerning real "Biblical Criticism", and I find that most Christians refuse to even consider the revelations.

This is one of the big reasons why I find myself as a "Lone Ranger" religion because most religious persons cling to their superficial and blind faith.

And speaking of that - true faith or mature faith is not meant to be blind at all, but rather it is to be the opposite. Faith is to be based on study and experience and on knowledge. Mature faith is to be tried and true and not based on dreams or wishes or on unsubstantiated hopes.

Biblical Criticism is a closed door to the spiritually blind.

"Biblical Criticism",

Click to expand...

from reading this thread and following your knowledge, one thing is certain. you dont know what biblical criticism is. Not a clue.

like any other christian your reading what you want out of it and not following any guidelines but your own. That is NOT criticism that is personal interpretation.

I find myself as a "Lone Ranger"

Click to expand...

thats because your the only person who shares your view. the guys that are way over your head and know what there doing are not going to come in here and reason because your in some fantasy land in my opinion. your reality has nothing to do with any real scholars work.

Lets do this the right way, and ill show my point.

give a short brief to the point paragraph on historical jesus life based on historocity.

corndog said:

It seems odd to say and believe the bible is in some places false and to then quote from it.

Click to expand...

Just FYI, the discipline of Biblical Criticism is recognized and embraced by the Catholic Church ever since it was incorporated at the 2nd Vatican Council in 1965.

QUOTE: "The council sought to revive the central role of Scripture in the theological and devotional life of the Church, building upon the work of earlier popes in crafting a modern approach to Scriptural analysis and interpretation." Link Wiki HERE.

It is said better but excessively long on the Catholic website here = Biblical Criticism - Original Catholic Encyclopedia.

Of course the Catholic Church does not embrace all Biblical Criticism including that they do not embrace all my own findings as the Catholics put their own interpretation on everything and that is cool by me. One of the greater Catholic expressions is like they will acknowledge parts of the Bible as wrong or interpolated but then they say it is still inspired anyway, as like inspired fables, Titus 1:14.

The Catholic Bible (not online) does give footnotes which tell the critical points on certain critical text, which in some ways make the Catholic Bible better than the Protestant Bibles which deny even the most simple truths from Biblical Criticism.

Of course most Catholics are like most Protestants in that they only believe the orthodox claims and reading the Bible is a trial to them.

:cold:

Biblical criticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here is the truth

It is said better but excessively long on the Catholic website here = Biblical Criticism - Original Catholic Encyclopedia.

Click to expand...

this is not biblical criticism as it is a biased view. real criticism is not biased

Just FYI, the discipline of Biblical Criticism is recognized and embraced by the Catholic Church ever since it was incorporated at the 2nd Vatican Council in 1965.

QUOTE: "The council sought to revive the central role of Scripture in the theological and devotional life of the Church, building upon the work of earlier popes in crafting a modern approach to Scriptural analysis and interpretation." Link Wiki HERE.

Click to expand...

this is also a false statement, the catholic church does not like bibilical criticism

outhouse said:

real criticism is not biased

Click to expand...

I simply must post my disagreement with this statement above because most people are biased in their own ways and I do not know if I have ever heard of any non-biased commentary in religion or in politics or simple conversation or in anything.

Many scholars in Biblical Criticism work from the position (the bias) of Atheism as the Bible is scrutinized as only a historical document and not as some message from God. The Catholic Church certainly uses Biblical Criticism from their belief in God as their ideal "Trinity" and they are proud of their biases.

I myself have a bias that I know that there is a real living and active "God" regardless of what the Bible might say or fail to say.

And seriously considering the dictionary definition of "criticism" implies a controlled and disciplined bias (rules) imposed by any competent scholar.

:yes:

micrurus said:

and there is also a page that give ALOT of contradictions in the bible.

Click to expand...

One of the big misunderstood stories in the Bible is that of the Prophet Elijah and Elisha, as they are both first recorded together as Elisha followed Elijah and their names are spelled and seem nearly the same while there is a huge distinction between these two.

Elijah is one of the greatest recorded prophets in the Bible while Elisha is the most infamous and undeserving of prophets.

Elisha made a "hard" request of Elijah for extra power as in a "double portion" for himself, per 2 Kings 2:9-15 link HERE.

Elijah is the one that is famously said to have taken off in a "flaming chariot" (verse 11) which gives the impression of a space craft taking off as described by a limited vocabulary.

So back to the follower Elisha - he used his powers for right and for wrong as like he would strike people blind but even worse is that Elisha shortly after gaining the "double portion" went out and had 2 bears to kill 42 children just for mocking him, per 2 Kings 2:22-25 link HERE, and this is a Bible description showing why God does not give powers to people who claim to be righteous and want to do right because power does corrupt the powerful.


:cold:

Gday,

Know it all. said:

The Bible is a translation and the King James Version was written in 1611 C.E. when slavery had a far different meaning then what the Bible was saying.

Click to expand...

No it didn't.
If YOU think it does, then please show your evidence.

Know it all. said:

The word for slave would be better translated as worker or employee or subordinate or servant which does not mean "slave" as us Caucasians defined the word.

Click to expand...

No it doesn't.

The Bible describes and regulates slavery - e.g. it says it's OK to BEAT your slaves, provided they don't die.

Have you ever actually READ the bible?

Do YOU believe it's OK to BEAT your slaves, sorry, subordinates?


Iasion

Gday,

Know it all. said:

I simply must post my disagreement with this statement above because most people are biased in their own ways and I do not know if I have ever heard of any non-biased commentary in religion or in politics or simple conversation or in anything.

Click to expand...

So,
OTHER people's bias makes them wrong !

Know it all. said:

I myself have a bias that I know that there is a real living and active "God" regardless of what the Bible might say or fail to say.

Click to expand...

But -
YOUR 'bias' is knowing the truth !

Hahahahahahaha.
What a joke.

Translation:
"I'm right, you're all wrong".



Iasion

Iasion said:

Gday,
No it didn't.
If YOU think it does, then please show your evidence.

No it doesn't.

The Bible describes and regulates slavery - e.g. it says it's OK to BEAT your slaves, provided they don't die.

Have you ever actually READ the bible?

Do YOU believe it's OK to BEAT your slaves, sorry, subordinates?
Iasion

Click to expand...

Here is one of many links as "evidence" = Slavery in antiquity - Wikipedia , and most reasonable scholars would have to acknowledge that the misunderstanding given by the misinterpretation of the "King James Bible" surely did promote the horrible race-based slavery perpetrated in the USA. Some Christians still today claim their right and justice to slavery as to other evils based on their reading of the KJV.

And yes I have read the Bible many times and in many different versions and I say it is just as wrong to beat a slave as it would be to beat an employee or any subordinate.

:slap:

Iasion said:

Gday,
So,
OTHER people's bias makes them wrong !

But -
YOUR 'bias' is knowing the truth !

Hahahahahahaha.
What a joke.

Translation:
"I'm right, you're all wrong".

Iasion

Click to expand...

You translating my words in such a negative way is your own doing as that is not done by me.

I expect other people to do as I do and to consider new evidence and check our conscience and then decide for oneself as to what is correct and what is not.

Being "bias" can be an evil thing but it does not have to be so.

We need to be bias for the truth and against lies, be bias for right against wrong.