|
Post by Archelaus on Jun 1, 2018 22:24:48 GMT
I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it has some human errors such as two different accounts of how Akeldama acquired the name "the Field of Blood" and how Judas Iscariot died.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Jun 1, 2018 22:37:46 GMT
The bible is the word of God, and should be taken seriously.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Jun 1, 2018 22:53:01 GMT
I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it has some human errors such as two different accounts of how Akeldama acquired the name "the Field of Blood" and how Judas Iscariot died. I always thought it sounded like a fake suicide attempt that backfired. One account, he hangs himself, and the other, he falls over and his guts fall out, apparently from something that he fell onto. So, together, considering Judas is a human devil, it sounds like Judas meant to pretend to be sorry, even though he wasn't, as he didn't want people to lose respect for him having the money, so he made sure the rope would break, but when it fell, he fell onto something sharp, a part of a fence I think, and the rest is History. May not be that way, but it's just the most plausible and logical explanation.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jun 1, 2018 23:49:50 GMT
No, and no 'ifs, ands or buts'. Neither is the Bhagavad Gita, the Torah, the Quran or any other human written document. And, to be crystal clear, there is no god to say words. Bhagvad Gita ( which is actually just a chapter inside the epic Mahabharata) should actually be a book to tell how people create gods. In the early parts of Mahabharata, the sun (God Surya) was the most powerful entity. Then Shaivites interpolated it and for that reasons there are many chapters in Mahabharata which says Shiva is all in all everything. Then Vaisjnavites interpolated it and added their own stuff. They made an otherwise normal character of the book - krishna - into an incarnation of Vishnu. Finally, the deity called Krishna became the central character of the book and became so famous that some Vaishnavites then started claiming Krishna is the god and Vishnu is his incarnation. I believe anyone with interest should read Mahabharata as to learn how the legends of gods were created. Wow, that has got to be the most interesting post I have ever seen here. How the legends of gods were created. If I may ask, did you study comparative religion? I have often wondered how this whole "god" thing got started, and while I know that religion was actually an evolutionary advantage - groups survive better than individuals - I could never quite understand why it wasn't discarded as science began to explain how the world really works.
|
|
Eλευθερί
Junior Member
@eleutheri
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 1,670
|
Post by Eλευθερί on Jun 2, 2018 0:22:58 GMT
Which of the following statements comes closest to your own feelings? (a) The Bible is the Word of God and should be taken literally, word for word (b) The Bible is the Word of God as God inspired men to write it; it contains some human errors and some imagery that is not to be taken literally, word for word (c) The Bible is NOT the word of God (d) I don't know I voted not the word of God™. I was going to vote inspired but with human error, but I believe that some things were put in intentionally for the purposes of control. To be clear, I also believe parts are inspired by God™. Of course, each person decides for her or himself how to reply to the poll. However, I think that choice (b) fits better with your description of your feelings. You say that parts of the Bible are inspired by God--which fits with "The Bible is the Word of God as God inspired em to write it." You also say that you think parts of it were put in intentionally [by men] to control other people [and those parts, presumably, are not what God intended]--which fits with "contains some human errors." I think choice (c) is for those who basically believe "The Bible is an ancient book of fables, legends, history, and moral precepts written by men [without any direct or inspired input from God]."
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jun 2, 2018 12:41:51 GMT
Bhagvad Gita ( which is actually just a chapter inside the epic Mahabharata) should actually be a book to tell how people create gods. In the early parts of Mahabharata, the sun (God Surya) was the most powerful entity. Then Shaivites interpolated it and for that reasons there are many chapters in Mahabharata which says Shiva is all in all everything. Then Vaisjnavites interpolated it and added their own stuff. They made an otherwise normal character of the book - krishna - into an incarnation of Vishnu. Finally, the deity called Krishna became the central character of the book and became so famous that some Vaishnavites then started claiming Krishna is the god and Vishnu is his incarnation. I believe anyone with interest should read Mahabharata as to learn how the legends of gods were created. Wow, that has got to be the most interesting post I have ever seen here. How the legends of gods were created. If I may ask, did you study comparative religion? Not formally but I had a comparative religion type of course in high school. I have in past posted on few Tibetan Buddhist and Hindu philosophy forums so I have gained a bit of knowledge on those two religions. The 6 schools of Hinduism provide a very good understanding of how religion was created and how religion had to adapt at various times to save itself to obscurity. Also, the divisions among Buddhism (Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana etc.) in post Buddha period explain the same thing. How Buddhism had to assimilate with local religions (like Shintoism) in Japan to establish itself gives an insight into how power structure works. Gods as well as other entities or state of beings (like Nirvana, Moksha etc.) were created for various reasons. Not all were good reasons and not all were bad reasons. It was just a function of time and human needs.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jun 2, 2018 13:06:39 GMT
I believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but it has some human errors such as two different accounts of how Akeldama acquired the name "the Field of Blood" and how Judas Iscariot died. Neither of those are errors unless you provide more detail to explain them as errors. The Field of Blood one I'm not even grasping the error accusation, but Judas' suicide is at best a lack of details regarding his death. It's perfectly OK to doubt or be annoyed by lack of information as well as to find narrative differences (Which could be errors in translation or information, but it's not my job to point them out.), but it's good to name them appropriately.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2018 18:09:24 GMT
The bible is the word of God, and should be taken seriously. Now those are two very different questions.
|
|