• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Misquoting Jesus (1 Viewer)

Gibberish

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
6,339
Reaction score
1,269
Location
San Diego, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I'm currently about half way through the book: Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. For those of you who have not heard of it you can find the description at the end of this post.

I agree with the concept and still cannot grasp how followers of the bible see this book as basically passed down by God. Now the book itself has great stories on moral issues and I think overall it teaches good lessons. Though it should be taken in as such, a collection of stories.

What are your thoughts on the bible? It is proven to be written by many men over a course of hundereds of years and most of the authors were seperated by the actual person in the story by three or four degrees. So where is the believe that the book in infallible?

The popular perception of the Bible as a divinely perfect book receives scant support from Ehrman, who sees in Holy Writ ample evidence of human fallibility and ecclesiastical politics. Though himself schooled in evangelical literalism, Ehrman has come to regard his earlier faith in the inerrant inspiration of the Bible as misguided, given that the original texts have disappeared and that the extant texts available do not agree with one another. Most of the textual discrepancies, Ehrman acknowledges, matter little, but some do profoundly affect religious doctrine. To assess how ignorant or theologically manipulative scribes may have changed the biblical text, modern scholars have developed procedures for comparing diverging texts. And in language accessible to nonspecialists, Ehrman explains these procedures and their results. He further explains why textual criticism has frequently sparked intense controversy, especially among scripture-alone Protestants. In discounting not only the authenticity of existing manuscripts but also the inspiration of the original writers, Ehrman will deeply divide his readers. Although he addresses a popular audience, he undercuts the very religious attitudes that have made the Bible a popular book. Still, this is a useful overview for biblical history collections. Bryce Christensen
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved
 
Perhaps I should clarify my questions.

1. Based on evidence and your personal knowledge what is your belief on the origins of the bible? Do you believe the bible was handed down by God? The writers talked to God and wrote down God's words?

2. If you believe the bible was written by man do you also believe the bible to be fallible as man is fallible? The bible has been translated many times. Do you believe each of these translators to have been inspired by God also so that they did not make errors in their translations?
 
I don't believe the bible is or was 'written by God'. It was written by men. The stories in the old testament are pure fable, probably to inspire moral behavior and as guidelines for the ancient believers.
Of course it's fallible, who lives over 900 years? Turned to a pillar of salt? Loses strength because the bitch cut his hair?
As far as the new testament, it's basically the same: if you don't follow the rules, this will happen. As parents, we use the same discipline: if you're not good, Santa won't bring toys.
The bible has been edited, rewritten, translated sometimes poorly and entire books deleted. Scrolls have been found that were obviously meant to be part, but were not.
If reading the bible truly gives one a sense of morals and peace, fine. Just too many times throughout history, it's so taken out of context and reworded as to seem to support less-than-stellar thinking.
 
Gibberish said:
1. Based on evidence and your personal knowledge what is your belief on the origins of the bible? Do you believe the bible was handed down by God? The writers talked to God and wrote down God's words?

I honestly think it was written by a bunch of ancient tribals with heatstroke.:lol: But seriously, I think that the idea of God is totally synthetic; man-made. Since the inception of the Bible, man created the notion of God, and he was believed in henceforth. If it were the words from a perfect entity's lips, we would be astounded at every single word, or we'd be struck with awe from reading it.

2. If you believe the bible was written by man do you also believe the bible to be fallible as man is fallible? The bible has been translated many times. Do you believe each of these translators to have been inspired by God also so that they did not make errors in their translations?

Nope, I believe each of these translators included or disgarded stuff which did/did'nt fit into their worldviews. For instance, take the KJV, full of "thees" and "thous", haha Moses or Jesus never uttered a "thee" or "thou" in their entire lives.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom