RELIGION

[Stealth3si]

Of course i dont believe all words in the Bible are true...how could they be??...nobody that wrote the Bible was there during the birth of Christ..the writers could not all have followed Jesus, Job, Moses, John the Baptist..etc...'individually' and wrote down what they did..step by step...

If we applied this criteria to other ancient literature then virtually no manuscripts of Plato, Homer's Iliad, or works of Copernicus or Aristotle, Socrates or Julius Ceaser, would pass.

(right now you can make a TRUE statement, and tell ONE person..but by the time it gets back to you, its no where near what the original statement was)..so no, i refuse to believe over a period of centuries that wise men kept all the facts separated from fiction)

If you're taking about MSS, then accurate biblical translations pretty much clarifies this misconception.

Not only that, but what about the King James version of the Bible?

Despite the KJV's influence on modern translations, it isn't the basis of them.

(old testament vs new?)..

The discovery of the DSS verified the OT reliability and THOUSANDS of NT MSS are in the original Greek dating before 500 A.D.

I tend to think of Religion as pure unadulterated evil, (a bunch of people saying "think like us, or burn in hell"..riiiight)...More hate has been spread at the hands of some Bible thumping hypocrite then people could ever realize....

"Religion" used to be synonymous with "Christianity." The current meaning of the word 'religion' however was used (i.e. Harris) to label atheist regimes "religions" and this definition was mainly needed to advance the argument that "religion" is the great cause of war and evil in the world in order to get around the fact that the most violent century in world history was also the most secular, (apparently allowing the secular state to gain all its power.)

Now, the term is usually understood to mean a type of ideology concerning gods.

You can of course broaden the definition of religion to include any ideology.

But there's an odd connection between how you think this way and other religions that may not fit your mold of what it is, say for instance Buddhism.

[Stealth3si]

i do not believe all words to be true as some conterdict themselves... as it says you are not to harm anyone.. but then in another book.. it states an eye for an eye... so you know somethings were added by man. but.... for the most part i do believe the word of the holy book

i do not believe all words to be true as some conterdict themselves... as it says you are not to harm anyone.. but then in another book.. it states an eye for an eye... so you know somethings were added by man. but.... for the most part i do believe the word of the holy book

I agree with you. There are contradictions in the bible, and that makes it hard to be a true follower. If you follow some rules, you are inherently breaking other rules. This is why different sects exist. Some may focus on "an eye for an eye," while others may focus on the commitment to do no harm.

An eye for an eye was a Mosaic law, a way for civil government to limit punishment. It was so that the typical practices of say, life for an eye, would not be taken.

It actually was put in place for justice to be meeted out in court cases. It had little to nothing to do with 'not harming anyone.'

FYI, Matthew 5
An Eye for an Eye
38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

We are to not only forgive those who do us wrong, but we are to be examples of God's grace to them.

Even when we forgive someone, that does not save them from the legal or necessary consequences of their actions. If I forgive a murderer, he may still get the death penalty.

From this we conclude that skeptics are just trying to see contradictions when there really isn't a problem at all, so the only reason to charge contradiction is if one has come trying to find contradiction; otherwise the issue doesn't even occur to us and we move on with our lives. Clearly, though, since Matthew relied on Moses, Matthew didn't particularly care to write in such a way that 21st century atheists would not have opportunity to search for contradictions in the text, and I don't see why 21st Christians should care any more than Matthew did.

[Stealth3si]

i do not believe all words to be true as some conterdict themselves... as it says you are not to harm anyone.. but then in another book.. it states an eye for an eye... so you know somethings were added by man. but.... for the most part i do believe the word of the holy book

I agree with you. There are contradictions in the bible, and that makes it hard to be a true follower. If you follow some rules, you are inherently breaking other rules. This is why different sects exist. Some may focus on "an eye for an eye," while others may focus on the commitment to do no harm.

would anyone like to point out Bible verses that have contradictions please. I've heard many people say the Bible has "contradictions" but no one wants to point out and find them....

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

The internet is FULL of people who misinterpret the Bible and make websites (and write books too!) based on their misinterpretations. This is not surprising, obviously.

[Stealth3si]

i do not believe all words to be true as some conterdict themselves... as it says you are not to harm anyone.. but then in another book.. it states an eye for an eye... so you know somethings were added by man. but.... for the most part i do believe the word of the holy book

I agree with you. There are contradictions in the bible, and that makes it hard to be a true follower. If you follow some rules, you are inherently breaking other rules. This is why different sects exist. Some may focus on "an eye for an eye," while others may focus on the commitment to do no harm.

would anyone like to point out Bible verses that have contradictions please. I've heard many people say the Bible has "contradictions" but no one wants to point out and find them....

They're not really that hard to find.  A five minute look around a Google of "biblical contradictions" will make that pretty evident.  A 2000 year old book that was passed down orally for centuries before being written down, translated into dozens of languages/dialects, and edited by the hands of thousands/millions of people with different agendas is going to have contradictions.  There are hundreds, probably thousands, in the Bible...fortunately for you and I, there are people who make a career out of analyzing the Bible and making lists of things like the contradictions throughout.  Google is your friend for that.  

Or maybe I think the biggest hermeneutical errors stem from people trying to read the Bible as if it was written yesterday for them personally, in English.

i do not believe all words to be true as some conterdict themselves... as it says you are not to harm anyone.. but then in another book.. it states an eye for an eye... so you know somethings were added by man. but.... for the most part i do believe the word of the holy book

I agree with you. There are contradictions in the bible, and that makes it hard to be a true follower. If you follow some rules, you are inherently breaking other rules. This is why different sects exist. Some may focus on "an eye for an eye," while others may focus on the commitment to do no harm.

would anyone like to point out Bible verses that have contradictions please. I've heard many people say the Bible has "contradictions" but no one wants to point out and find them....

If you don't want to Google it, this might be a starter:  http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html#contradictions

Infidels is like any other polemical website -- basically not worth your time.

[Stealth3si]

Do I believe the words of the bible are true? Do I believe the words of a politician?  That would be a big no for both. Man has a tendency to stretch the truth and twisting things for his benefit. That is why I don't partake in "Religion". Some of the things that these secs come up with is just outrageous.

nope. im not a religious person at all. i believe that man wrote the bible cause HE was a religious man and thought that people needed an incentive to do good and not evil

This is exactly the difference between us! In your world, it is God OR man. In your world, if texts are the product of actual humans in actual history who have actual cultures and desires and contexts and so on then they cannot also be God's texts.

[Stealth3si]

For those of you who believe every word of the Bible;
1.Fill a drinking glass with bleach.
2.Read Mark chapter 16 verse 18.
3.CALL AN AMBULANCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!,
4.Do the second thing the verse says you can do without being harmed.
                     GOOD LUCK!

All your readings of the Bible are very "flat" (scare quotes to remove the pejorative connotation) in my view because you live in a "flat" world -- a world defined by dichotomies which turn poetic modes of truth into "cultic imagery."

Would you give money to a man telling stories about mythology? The only difference is that some people actually believe the christianity scam which allows some other people to get rich off it.

The people who you are referring to, say for typical instance, televangelists, aren't really representative of any kind of serious Christianity, since most of them appear to be frauds.

[Stealth3si]

I believe religion is just a crutch in life, like an entertaining story. And those who take it seriously just have clouded minds.

Where you see "religious bible-thumpers" (quotes not to insinuate a pejorative tone) taking the bible too seriously, I see political "fundamentalists" taking things too literally, thereby "stagnating" Christianity into a "myth."

Also, while on the subject, can anyone explain why the bible is not considered a myth by many? I mean, it's just as believable as Zeus and Pandora.

Why would anyone care to explain to you something you obviously don't care about? 

[extinct]

some were edited and written by mankind later

[brianandugg]

Its mans interpretation of what God told them. If it all was true, then in revelation when the locust with armor crowns and tails came, they would literally be that. Or the woman and the beast. It all how men interpreted Gods Words. We cannot think we are so much alike him to understand what he's told us fully. Thats why God had to have Jesus tell us everything in parables, or else we wouldnt get it. Haha and we still hardly ever do. I just wish people would follow basically what the bible says, instead of preaching words they dont follow. We should be like the Good Sameritan right?

[stylindiva]

I don't believe EVERY word in the bible, its been translated so many times in so many languages over the years, alot meaning may have been lost in translation.

[fazedx]

"I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy." (JER 13:14) "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling."

"The Lord is very pitiful and of tender mercy." (JAS 5:11)
"For his mercy endureth forever." (1CH 16:34)
"The Lord is good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works." (PSA 145:9)
"God is love." (1JO 4:16)

so does god accept all or utterly destroy some?

[texasmoma69]

DO YOU BELIEVE THAT ALL WORDS IN THE BIBLE IS  TRUE?

No

[liljp617]

I always have a nice chuckle when someone's claim against the contradictions is that people are misinterpreting it. As if there is some rigorous method that theologians use to get the true interpretation of scripture - laughable nonsense.  Why is my interpretation wrong, and yours is infallible?  Why is the interpretation of countless Biblical scholars who spend their whole career examining every facet of the Bible incorrect, yet yours remains correct?

Would you give money to a man telling stories about mythology? The only difference is that some people actually believe the christianity scam which allows some other people to get rich off it.

The people who you are referring to, say for typical instance, televangelists, aren't really representative of any kind of serious Christianity, since most of them appear to be frauds.

What is "serious Christianity?"  Why is your version of Christianity any more respectable or "correct" than, say, the televangelist's?  What is a Christian?  What makes a self-proclaimed Christian actually not a Christian at all?  And who in the world is making the criteria that distinguish "real Christianity" from "fake Christianity?"

[Stealth3si]

I always have a nice chuckle when someone's claim against the contradictions is that people are misinterpreting it. As if there is some rigorous method that theologians use to get the true interpretation of scripture - laughable nonsense.  Why is my interpretation wrong, and yours is infallible?  Why is the interpretation of countless Biblical scholars who spend their whole career examining every facet of the Bible incorrect, yet yours remains correct?

You'd only have a case if Biblical scholars held the same assumption as the skeptics and their adversaries do.

So I'd say that on one level you're attacking the right thing but you haven't gotten around the central tenet of conflicting paradigms and the groundwork of an interpretors' integrity behind their assumptions and worldviews.

Would you give money to a man telling stories about mythology? The only difference is that some people actually believe the christianity scam which allows some other people to get rich off it.

The people who you are referring to, say for typical instance, televangelists, aren't really representative of any kind of serious Christianity, since most of them appear to be frauds.

What is "serious Christianity?"  Why is your version of Christianity any more respectable or "correct" than, say, the televangelist's?  What is a Christian?  What makes a self-proclaimed Christian actually not a Christian at all?  And who in the world is making the criteria that distinguish "real Christianity" from "fake Christianity?"

I was merely pointing out the politics people use, (i.e., fundamentalism, reality TV, political debate shows) and extreme approaches to religion (i.e., Barth, Dominionists, evangelicals, Dawkins, "Prophecy Experts," 700 Club or Josh McDowell)

[gsn4u]

yea