Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

[Rusty Tyler]

Rusty Tyler said:
What would suffice as evidence?

No offense intended. But this is a stupid question. I would only know post hoc.Any attempt to answer that question would be incomplete and preliminary at best.

But what is poor evidence is scripture. Especially any writing that describes supernatural events.

That doesn't seem to be a good reason to dismiss supernatural events that occurred in the first century.
Just because you don't believe they could happen today.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

What work and why do you accept it?.

They had a council and work to determine was inspired.

This seems to be a deliberate attempt of yours not explain why you accept the present Bible is true.

Desperate? Nope.
The Bible is man-made and has its problems. But is largely useful.

 

[zooterkin]

Many? I can only think of a couple.
Like when the fig tree withered? (immediately, or overnight)

What about the different accounts of the resurrection?

 

[zooterkin]

No.
I do believe in elohim. (plural for gods)
Elohim (capital E) being the supreme God.

LDS?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

What about the different accounts of the resurrection?

What about them?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

LDS?

Nope.

 

[zooterkin]

What about them?

Pay attention. You asked for more examples of conflicting reports of the same event. I gave you one.

 

[Helen]

What about them?

Yes, that's what zooterkin asked; "what about the different accounts of the resurrection?" - you can read it for yourself, if you don't believe me, it's right up there, in post 71.

 

[zooterkin]

Not familiar. Send help.

Beowulf - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Mojo]

I don't believe that in the standard way.
I limit what I consider to be divine revelation.
An English translation was created by men.

So were the originals it was translated from.

 

[Helen]

Rusty Tyler said:
What would suffice as evidence?

That doesn't seem to be a good reason to dismiss supernatural events that occurred in the first century.
Just because you don't believe they could happen today.

Unevidenced supernatural events that occurred 2000 years ago can be quite easily dismissed, since there is no reason to believe that they happened.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Pay attention. You asked for more examples of conflicting reports of the same event. I gave you one.

Where is the conflict. You neglected to mention that.

 

[Helen]

There is more evidence for some of the events in the Iliad, and, for that matter, in Beowulf, than there is for all of the supernatural stuff in thr bible.

 

[Helen]

Where is the conflict. You neglected to mention that.

Have you read the bible? I assumed you had.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Yes, that's what zooterkin asked; "what about the different accounts of the resurrection?" - you can read it for yourself, if you don't believe me, it's right up there, in post 71.

LOL

What about the different accounts of the resurrection?

Nobody home. - LOL

 

[Helen]

LOL

Nobody home. - LOL

Perhaps you should try to answer zooterkin's question.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

So were the originals it was translated from.

The originals are long gone. All they had to wok with was copies of copies of copies of copies...

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus - Textual Criticism 101 - Berean Patriot

There are three major competing Greek sources to use for translating the New Testament: the Critical Text, the Majority Text, and the Textus Receptus. The science of assembling these manuscripts is called “Textual Criticism”, and you can consider this a complete Textual Criticism 101 article...

www.bereanpatriot.com

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Unevidenced supernatural events that occurred 2000 years ago can be quite easily dismissed, since there is no reason to believe that they happened.

Of course.
The written eye-witness accounts were the evidence.

 

[Helen]

The originals are long gone. All they had to wok with was copies of copies of copies of copies...

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus - Textual Criticism 101 - Berean Patriot

There are three major competing Greek sources to use for translating the New Testament: the Critical Text, the Majority Text, and the Textus Receptus. The science of assembling these manuscripts is called “Textual Criticism”, and you can consider this a complete Textual Criticism 101 article...

www.bereanpatriot.com

Exactly. What are your thoughts about the linguistic and intertextual capabilities of those who tried to make it all fit together, all those centuries ago? And did they by chance have any agendas that could have meant that they were biased?

 

[Steve]

Where did Mary and Joseph come from?

A few 2000 year old fables.