The Bible

Imperial_Samurai> “Well, perhaps open minded is to strong a word, but one can allow for conviction, after all, even researchers have beliefs sometimes.”
Yes, but when this “belief” is not a background thing but the driving force behind research, this research will be neither neutral nor impartial.

“This was just to elaborate that there is a growing recognition among researchers in the humanities that the bible actually does contain facts, that there is evidence there was a flood.”
Say you! Prove that there is a growing recognition.
You seem to misunderstand an important fact here. There ARE people and places in the Bible that did indeed exist or still exist today. This is not a novel discovery – heck – Jerusalem is still around. But what does THAT mean? The Buddhist books, and the Koran are both based on real people and events as well.
Yes, there is evidence of floods… And flood-stories in many mythologies around the world. Does that mean these mythologies are true, or that flood-stories around the world are all based on a factual event some 12.000 years ago?

As this Clifford-guy has NO credibility in my book… What other sources aside from him support that the walls of Jericho did mysteriously fall as the Israelis passed? Any non-creationists?

Originally posted by finti
It is just the New testament that has been written by the followers of christ, not the entire bible.

But the entire Bible was written by people who believe either in Jesus' coming (OT) or him in person (NT). And because the OT was written by Christian believes, it is written by followers of Christ 😕

in Jesus' coming (OT)

And because the OT was written by Christian believesit is written by followers of Christ

Not all the books of the NT were written by people who actually met or had contact with chirst. Wasn't Corinthinians written between leaders of the early church long after the death of jesus?

The earliest Gospel supposedly wasn't written until approximately 100 years after the fact.

Thats kind of remembered hearing before. There is a difference in the usuage of language in the bible. Certain citeis and places mentioned in the Bible were not even in existence when Jesus was alive, or they were known by a different name. It is one of the techniques they use to try date passages in the bible.

That's how they did it, huh? Makes sense....
I can't remember where I heard that but it was likely the History Channel.

the bible not only coincides with other peoples history of that time but it gives a vary vivid account of the creation, it has perfectly explainable reasons for everything in life, there are things in the bible men could not have possilbly known at the time yet scientists make these amazing discoveries all the the time even though it was said word for word in the bible these things existed. oh and the whole carbon dating evolution thing doesnt really work because even scientists admit they just came up with and assigned a half life number to uranium so how do you go by a way of dating if the main part of it was just fabricated?

hey finti umm christian actually just means christ like or follower of christ soo they were christians

Yeah, i guess things like dialect and use of certain words gives that away too. I was reading it on some website trying to find the earliest date that i could for when the bible was in its current form. The site i was on got into determining the age of the different books of the Bible.

sense:

I think what Finti was saying earlier is that the Jews who wrote the Old Testament were waiting for a messiah, not christ specifically. Since the Jewish people reject Christ as the true Messiah, they would not be considered followers of Christ. Making them Jews, not christians who wrote the OT.

did you know the bible gives a very good reason for dinosaurs well atleast the big ones the average dinosaur was only about a foot tall. i will explain only if it is wanted i dont feel like typing for no reason

right but the jews were already told they would not inherit the kingdom of heaven so the gentiles were also followers of christ which makes them christians does it not?

there were jews who believed jesus was the messiah

Carbon dating is based on evidence found in nature. People were able to figure out the half-life of uranium by studying things: I can't remember the specifics right now.

is that it?

there are no specifics. noone can prove all uranium deteriates at the same time its just a guess

They were promised a saviour were they not? a messiah? Thats how i remember it. They do not believe Jesus was the messiah; they dont follow his teachings or believe his prophecies. Ask a Jew sometime if he believes that Christ is the Messiah. A believer in the jewish faith could probably give you a better answer than I can. So, no I don't think that makes them christians.

if so prove it.

well if you want to get technical christ and messiah mean the same thing: savior. they dont believe jesus was but some of them at the time did even the pharisees who had him tried believed when he gave up his spirit. wat to go.