Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It would more likely be legend than anything else. Is Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter history?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Bible - Why Trust It
- Thread starter nPeace
- Start date
PearlSeeker
Well-Known Member
It is a story. A story that includes historical information. History is extracted/constructed from such stories.
More on historical thinking and method:
Historical Truth
Source criticism - Wikipedia
nPeace
Veteran Member
What does similarities have to do with the truthfulness of something?
nPeace
Veteran Member
These Bible characters did not likely exist. Nor were they probably someone else in the past.
That reference does not compare.
nPeace
Veteran Member
When something is written as a story, there are a few things we expect - the author does not say it is actually history; there is no reason to conclude otherwise, given that no effort is made to prove the story reliable, and no evidence at all is there to verify the story.
On the other hand, when something is writen as history, the author(s) make this clear; they presents facts to demonstrate the accounts are reliable; evidence is available, to verify the accounts.
Two or three witnesses can provide a solid basis for truth.
Where the Bible is concerned, those three are present, and each has its own body of evidence, making them credible witnesses.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
The Bible - Why Trust It
Isn't the Hellenist Paulians'- Bible aka "Christian-Bible/Gospels/NT" an accusation on/against (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah that it is from him, as it sounds loudly from its internal contents, please, right?
Regards
____________
#1 by our friend nPeace, “Religion: Christian” thread “The Bible - Why Trust It “
Isn't the Hellenist Paulians'- Bible aka "Christian-Bible/Gospels/NT" an accusation on/against (Jesus) Yeshua- the Israelite Messiah that it is from him, as it sounds loudly from its internal contents, please, right?
Regards
____________
#1 by our friend nPeace, “Religion: Christian” thread “The Bible - Why Trust It “
Last edited:
Bharat Jhunjhunwala
TruthPrevails
True. But cannot be ignored either especially when analogy is seen in same genealogical order.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So you say. The more I look into it, the more I see the accounts about Moses, the history of the Jews in the wilderness and prior to that, plus Joshua, are not legendary. You and others considering themselves realistic and/or knowledgeable may believe they are, but similar to evolution, your belief as well as those considered authorities, does not make it so. The Bible speaks for itself, including the transmission and care of the Hebrews regarding the writing and copying. That there were no tell-tale signs that scholars found re the wilderness sojourn does not make their suppositions true.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Really? What sources do you use? Do you use legitimate sources, which would be scholars that are willing to put their reputation on the line by publishing in peer reviewed journals or do you use Christian apologists, AKA Liars For Jesus? I have no respect for Christian apologists since I cannot seem to find any honest ones.
Actual scholars can explain to you why it is a myth. Can you seriously tell me which sources your read that you trust? It is easy to fool oneself by "doing my own research". That usually means choosing anyone that says what you like and not those that are honest.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
The more I read, (the more I research) I wonder about the charge someone made about Krishna and Kamsa as analogous to a history of Moses, and I asked the poster if he (she?) knew when this happened, couldn't find anything about it on the internet, wonder if you know since you're interested in putting down the Bible.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I do not agree with many scholars, even those promoting for Jesus. (Similar to those that put down evolution -- I don't necessarily agree with them either about their take on things.)
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I already gave you the opposing viewpoint but again, you fail to see it. I was reading a little about good old Einstein and find one of his posits is in harmony with the Bible, probably he didn't even know it when he wrote about relativity. In fact, until I read it in a way I understood it about a solar eclipse that happened a while back, said to "prove" his theory of relativity, I didn't understand it. But you know, it is in harmony with what the Bible says. I FINALLY understood it! He may not have known his theory to be in harmony with the Bible's description of space. Yeah, well anyway, have a good evening, take care.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Why would you disagree with scholars? Scholars get in trouble if they are obviously biased. Scholars can tell you why they believe what they believe. You do not appear to be able to do that . You do not even appear to have any reliable sources.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, you just denied what has been supported by research and study. You need evidence when you make claims.
And why bring Einstein into it? I would like to know what you had a problem with and how you think that it jibes with the Bible. You may be reading into the Bible. Not reading out of it.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
The question comes up as to how do you think all those historical figures (specifically the kings, their offspring and incidents, good and bad) were written about. You think it was all made up?
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So do you. You bring nothing essentially but your own viewpoint. The research and study says nothing about the reality (meaning verifiable facts) about the first organisms and their growth on this earth.
I brought Einstein into it because with all his innovative thinking, I have been reading a few things about him, he may have unwittingly agreed with what the Bible said insofar as the fabric of the universe.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Actually it does, but you refuse to even learn the bare basics of science. When you are ready to learn the basics we can do that. Then we can discuss abiogenesis.
He thought that the Bible was largely superstitious claptrap. That does not mean that he would not be able to find a few good things in it.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Well-educated people don't even agree with each other. While I find it interesting, it is also notable to me that the rather detailed history in the Bible shows that the nation God made a covenant with in the wilderness was often at odds with Him then, and as the centuries wore on. He was not happy with them very often.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
lol, not going to say anything here -- lest you bring up Miller-Urey?
HE, meaning Einstein, probably did not read the Bible much, he was a secular Jew from a non-religious home, so he probably wouldn't have known what it said regarding the theory of relativity. He did not say he was an atheist. Something held him in. And I don't blame him.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And you just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding what science is and what evidence is. Like it or not the Miller-Urey experiment is evidence for abiogenesis. It answers one of the problems. It is not "proof" since it is only one small piece of evidence in a very complex problem. You keep conflating evidence with "proof". Now the fact is that abiogenesis is almost certainly how life began. We do have scientific evidence for that. We do not have scientific evidence for magic.lol, not going to say anything here -- lest you bring up Miller-Urey?