PDA

View Full Version : The Bible: Factuous? Fictious? Discuss.. PISSED, PROFESSIONAL AND DANNY


aMERiKaZ NiGHTMaRE
07-07-2008, 08:44 PM
Well The Nostradamus Question Has Been Satisfied, And I Submit To The Professional, Partially Because I Cant Be Fucked, And Mostly Because Of Lack Of Credible Evidence. But Now This Bible Stuff Has Me Waning For More And Im Sure It Will Make For A Good Discussion.

PLEASE BE AWARE - THIS THREAD MAY OFFEND

Now People, I Dont Care For If You Have Your Own Set Ideas And Ideologies. When Entering This Thread, PLEASE Follow These Rules.

RESPECT OTHER PEOPLES IDEAS. DO NOT SLANDER THEM FOR IT.
KEEP AN OPEN MIND. IT GENERATES WHOLISTIC DEBATES.








Now I Begin; (And for the sake of danny, I shall type correctly):D





I will begin with the comments from Pissed and The Professional.

Yeah Im A Christian And Yes I've Read The Bible. And Actually, 6 is not the real number of the devil it is a commercialized and society-driven mark created by people today. Ill prove it if you really want me to. I read it somewhere in the translations of the Bible.

In this, you could be correct. The Bible states;

Revelations 13:18



ωδέ η σοφία εστίν; ο έχων νουν ψηφισάτω τον αριθμόν του θηρίου; αριθμός γαρ ανθρώπου εστί; και ο αριθμός αυτού χξϛ΄.



Ode e sophia estin; o echon noun psephisato ton arithmon tou therio; arithmos gar anthropou erti; kai arithmos aytou 666.


Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Now although this can be interpreted two ways, other "Numbers of the beast" have been found and translated in different manuscripts. These include, 616 - As translated by Oxford scholars (LINK (http://www.religionnewsblog.com/11134/beasts-real-mark-devalued-to-616)) - And 665, in an 11th century manuscript, Codex 2344, as 665 (χξε') - Wikiquote - Citations Needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_of_the_beast)


"Six hundred threescore and six" can be interpreted in many ways, the most common resulting in 666. Although the original scripts give χξϛ, being the greek numerical 666 - LINK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_numerals) - and not "Six hundred threescore and six", they are roughly interpreted the same.

The most common misconception, is ignoring the rest of the verse.


Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Ignore the red and interpret the rest. Now by saying - "Here is the wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast" - Would refer directly to those with the ability to disect this paragraph and understand its contents to its original conceptors intention. If one was to make the bold statement - "I understand" - They would be quite ignorant and clearly would not. This is the first doctrine of the wise, never attempt to understand that which comes from perspective, for perspective - perspectively - will continuously be different.

"For it is the number of man" - This may perhaps be the greatest waning probability of this verse, as the number of man - as man is commonly refered to as "Adam" - will equate to 46 in the greek phonetical alphabet - LINK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet) - that being - All greek letters are represented by numbers as well. Perhaps by coincidence, man as a creature has 46 chromosones - LINK (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosone#Human_chromosomes) - so this statement may prove to be true, although the idea of ancient scribe writers knowing this fact is obsurd, if not scary.

Perhaps the statement - "and his number is six threescore and six" - Is not in fact what was meant to be interpreted.

"Let him who hath understanding count the number of the beast; For it is the number of man; and his number is six threescore and six"

Perhaps the reference is to man. Perhaps the beast descibed is man, and the "six threescore and six" relates to that entity specifically, and a set condition, fufilling the 666 numeracy - in any spacial or quantiful reference.

Such is as speculation, however, when speaking in biblical terms, speculation is the language in which we speak.

Eh not so fast, the Bible is actually God's Breath On Paper... i could find that verse somewhere just dont feel like looking it up but im 100% sure thats a verse. And If you believe that the Bible is real, well then you must believe God wrote it. Now i do agree that alot of the Catholic church is commericialized and corrupt but that is just large catholic church and the Diosis as a whole. And no i do not believe in direct translation of the bible thats just absurd and that would be extremely ignorant to believe things such as: Adam and Eve sitting happily in a garden when a snake offers them an apple. Obvioulsy its not met to be translated DIRECTLY its alot of dicyhpering and translating.

I shall compliment The Professional's response with my own.

The bible, is a religious tool, which carries on the doctrine - being "Gods will" - and legacy of his sons, disciples and followers. It is 'said to be' written by god himself, channeled through man. It is, however, a matter of speculation, and by saying that the bible was "Written in gods image", as accepted by many - that would be entirely more correct.
I believe in the bible, because I can see it, touch it, read it and set it on fire - If I wished such a thing :D - And I believe in many of the doctrines it sets, I however despise that it is all atributed to "God", when I believe it is the idea of man, or of several individuals. It would be entirely correct to state that the bible was "Written in gods image", as many a scholar from ancient times gathered to write it despite;


Papyrus being a very expensive commodity, and only available in such regions of the world as the turkish empire and the egyptian empire. Christianity and the western empires of the ancient world never had a good run. Great measures were taken to establish trade for these commodities.
The ability to write, was only possessed by those educated, and those educated were often rich, or few and finite.
Despite all of these facts, they still continued based on their belief. So in every essence - The bible was written in gods image - Rather than the word of god himself. Many of these men were executed or persecuted for heresay, but regardless continued their work. Many attribute this to "Faith in god" and I do agree, these men let their faith lead them blindly into whatever would eventuate, in turn creating the single largest and most documented piece of ancient literature the world has ever seen.

Many verses and chapters of the bible are from Jesus' disciples. This would in fact not be the breath of god, but rather the accounts and recollections of a group of men inspired by Jesus. Thus again, proving to be closer related to being "Written in gods image", rather than being "The breath of god".

I do not take everything written in the bible "As is", and accept a responsibility to look at it with an inch of stone, rather than a hardened eye. Everything I read, I either interpret myself, or adopt anothers interpretation. I never assess "With a grain of salt".



the Bible is like a tablet, used to connect people on a single level while connecting to the individual's spirituality, interpretations. For instance, I studied the bible for my entire childhood and distanced myself from it for a period of time between my teen years. Reading the teachings of Jesus after developing my own vantage of GOD, the pure light from which hues are refracted and perceived, had a profound effect on me because both levels of interpretation revealed paralleled truths, as the truth does not contradict itself. When Jesus speaks of being, he alludes to this ultimate reality of which all vantages perceive, being the embodiment of such statements as "I am the way and the truth and the life". For what matters, Jesus is the embodiment of what we can be, and ultimately are without realization. The path is within. Many others have expressed their relationship with GOD throughout time, and the truth of their expressions lie within a path you have yet to realize, or already know without knowing until known.
Jesus taught metaphysics, not theology.

I can honestly say that MANE has cracked the nutshell. This is the open belief that many need and want. MANE - you have my upmost respect, something that continues to grow.

pissedgoodnamesaretaken
07-07-2008, 09:21 PM
Alright Im Here, And Just To Reiterate What AN Said, I Have An Open Mind And Have Studied Many Religions So Im Open To Discussion And Other's Opinions. Im A Christian, True... But Im Not A 'Im-right-your-wrong-i-dont-care-what-you-say' Type Of Person... So Im Here For A Discussion With Danny, Americaz... And Profess. : )

Oh And Im Still Waiting on your verse AN.. take your time though brah.

dannyruxspin
07-07-2008, 10:01 PM
*Appreciates non-excessive use of the shift key*

My view on the Bible may not motivate this discussion in any way. I have only read it in it's entirety twice since my confirmation at 14 (2 times in 12 years).

I am a Christian as if a cow is born in a tree it's a bird: I'm not a fanatic. The reason I've even read the Bible (which I did amazingly AFTER I stopped attending church regularly) was more for guidance. If my life is ever in an extremely bad situation, I read Psalms. I'm not sure why, it is my second favorite book of the Bible. One thing I find fascinating is that these people so dearly loved what they believed in they documented events that took place, the other thing I find fascinating is that this compilation of, (well, diaries) has lasted since well, (allegedly) the beginning of time!

My reason for not declaring any denomination would be: more than one (denomination) follows the teachings of the Old Testament. Who's right? Are we all God's children? I do know the Bible states we should congregate with others and express our love for God, but how do we know the correct congregation?

Also, I'm pretty sure the original books of the Bible were written in many different languages (Arabic and Hebrew to start). My confidence in translations as you may know (from our past debate) is, well, non-existent.

As far as the "Mark of the Beast" argument. A score is twenty, if I am not mistaken. However, in my experience, (at least with the King James version) the bible was never that easily interpreted in our current English. That one is interesting, I lay idle waiting to see Pissed's quote stating the number is not "Six, three score and six"

The Professional
07-08-2008, 12:18 AM
Well, I'll be honest, I pretty much completely agree with AN and MANE. In fact, MANE's words pretty much reaffirm what I have come to believe in recent months. I've been heavy into Buddhism for much of the past few years, and one of the major tenets of Buddhist (depending on the school of thought...I think it's mahayana but it might be theravada) ideology is that every person has Buddha nature within them, and anybody can become a Buddha. Not all Buddhists believe this, but I do, which also leads me to believe that Jesus was a Buddha. I just think that it's a striking similarity how I try to find the Buddha within me, while others look for God or Jesus within them.

This whole revelation is what led me to my view on religion that I have now. I used to be very athiest, to the point where I was also anti-Christian and nihilistic. Haha and I know Buddhism and nihilism don't mesh...but it was a transitional period for me so don't hate lol. Now I tend to believe that all religions are both correct and incorrect. This is a philosophy that I kinda just came up with myself, so forgive me if I don't explain it properly.

My belief is that there is a chance that there is another entity out there. It (referred to as "he" from now on) is not necessarily God, or YHWH, or Allah, or Jehovah, or Mother Earth, or Buddha, or Atman, or Joe Pesci (for the Carlin fans out there lol). But in the same way that it is not all those things, it is also all those things. I simply choose to refer to it as the universe. When you cross-examine many of the more popular religions, you see that they're pretty much all the same. All of these entities share similar traits, the most obvious being omniprescense. These religions also essentially engage their devotees in a quest for some sort of greater state, be it oneness with God, Nirvana, whatever. It's late, and I know this isn't too incredibly cohesive, but my point is that it doesn't matter what language you use to express what you believe in, because it's all the same. I think it's possible that this being, in showing TRUE omniscience and omnipotence, created different religions because he realized that different people in different cultures need different means in order to reach the same result (the aforementioned "greater state"). It is for this reason that I try to encourage people, in word and action, to accept and be tolerant of all other religions.

Although I personally choose the Buddhist philosophies to be the best possible person I can be, the path is not what matters. If I was a devout Christian, I wouldn't live my life any differently except for a few of the more ritualistic parts of religion such as church and prayer. Other than that, there's not much of a difference in the moral lifestyle of a modern Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, or Druid.

I have more to say, but not the energy. To be continued.

Trigo
07-08-2008, 12:28 AM
Religion forum?

The Man In Your HeadZ
07-08-2008, 09:42 PM
The world is coming to a fucking end, who cares.

dannyruxspin
07-08-2008, 10:26 PM
The world is coming to a fucking end, who cares.


Wow... Ok...



Religion forum?


I don't think so much. This did not start as a discussion of theology, it started as a discussion of the Bible's credibility. The Bible might be associated with religion, but you do not have to be religious to join the conversation.

admin
07-08-2008, 10:36 PM
If any members are interested, I have a scripture discussion forum at http://www.Bible-Discussion.com