We all go through dark times - because of a family death, or a disability, or rules we cannot bend, and all of that is described by people who experienced the same things.
The crucifixion of Christ is of course well known with its own place in history but his last day became more clear to me from watching The Passion where the words became visual scenes of inhumanity. Did the Romans really kill people like that? Not just to Jesus, but to anyone outside the law? Wow...what a way to go!
The disciples called by Jesus were everyday people. If Jesus picked disciples today, they could be me and you. Jesus might have walked into the Christian bookstore and picked the guy behind the counter, or a secretary in an office, a vet, a farmer, maybe even a radio guy. An unconnected group of people.
The epistles books tell us about how to live a good life, how to raise our kids properly, how we can be a good companion to our spouse and how to manage our money.
The songs in the Psalms were written with such passion that for centuries, especially over the last 20 years, musicians have added music and rearranged the verses into lyrics, so we can sing them as songs and play them on the radio without losing the original message. Songs about our dreams, our troubles and our loves.
First, for 2,000 years it has been read, loved and held in the highest esteem. If it is fiction, as my Dad still thinks, it surely would have been exposed by now and forgotten. I mean, 2,000 years is a long time to be on the best sellers list! It is read by dumb and smart people who both come to the same conclusions.
And secondly, there is such a wide variety of ideas that I can't conceive that a small group of dumbos could write in detail, with as much passion, and wisdom, and variety about life and God, the past and future, so much so, that it converts the lifestyle of the reader.
When I think of some of my smarter Christian friends, or Christian rock stars, or big names in the history of the world who have all decided that the Bible is real - to me, that's quite the endorsement. It leaves me thinking, if these smart people all believe it's real, maybe it's real. Because if the Bible was fiction, it wouldn't have lasted this long.
I struggle with many verses that seem to contradict each other but because I've decided this is actually God's Word, it is very possible, and highly likely, that my confusion about contradiction comes from my own misunderstanding.
Like, how can a guy live in the belly of a whale for three days and not die?! Wouldn't the fluids or lack of oxygen kill the guy? I just shrug my shoulders.
Here's the irony; there isn't any real tangible evidence of anything I believe. Just stories and history - and faith. Hmmmm. All I have to do is look up and see creation around me and admit that somehow this all happened by a higher power.
If God made it all happen then the amazing Bible stories that have survived thousands of years are probably true, too.
The Bible makes me wonder too. There is nothing in it that couldn't have been written by Bronze aged humans, and yet it's held up as the word of God. It's often beautiful and historically accurate and fascinating and wise, almost as often as it's terrible, fictitious, dull, and ignorant.
ReplyDeleteI would think that if Christians really read the book as the word of God they may do as their told by their nasty desert God and murder anyone working on the Sabbath, or cover the head of any woman going to church amongst many other silly prohibitions.
I really enjoyed your second last paragraph, where you clearly state that it's a 'faith' thing, and there is no real evidence, I totally agree with this statement. Faith is important to believers, it's unfortunate it's considered a virtue at all. Belief without evidence is a huge problem in the world.
The idea that the Jesus story is historical is simply a difficult claim to make. Not only do the gospels have discrepancies among the 'eyewitness' accounts (eyewitness meaning written 200-300 years after the alleged events). It seems clear that a historical preacher named Jesus was alive at one point in time, but the rending of the temple veil, the raising of Jerusalem's dead, the census, etc. etc. are not historical at all. I'm not saying Jesus didn't exist, the historical proof is just not as solid as Christians think it is. The fact that you reference Mel Gibson's torture porn as a positive connection to the alleged event is a little disturbing. The Romans were brutal, but Mel's tasteless approach to whip up a fundamentalist fervour is pretty obvious shlock.
The history of the bible is more than dubious. Even Jewish archeologists have almost universally accepted that Moses never lived, Egypt never enslaved Jews, there was no wandering in the desert, etc. etc. These are stories meant to boost the morale of a tribal group of displaced people. There is very little historicity in the Bible, and that's fine. The earth wasn't created in 6 days, snakes and mules don't talk, there was no Adam and Eve, there was no flood. That's OK, metaphor and ancient tales are awesome, they can even contain wisdom and gravitas.
Continued:
ReplyDeleteThroughout your commentary you also make a lot of logical fallacies.
Your first is the 'Appeal to Popularity'. By claiming that the Bible has been around for 2000 years says nothing about it's truth or Godliness. A lot of other holy books are older than that, does that mean they are correct too? The bible has been re-written and edited from the Council of Nicea to our modern 'Red Letter' versions. Books have been added and removed (Gnostic Gospels), new translations have mistranslated certain words and terms. This is also a partial 'Appeal to Ancient Wisdom' as almost everything we knew in the Bronze Age has been overturned by years of science and discovery. A 2000 year old book is full of errors (The Pentateuch is 4000 or 5000 years old... almost as old as some ignorant fundamentalists believe the age of the earth is) and it is filled with mistakes. The sun is not a disk, the sky is not a veil, stars are not holes in that veil, the earth is not flat, it's not the centre of the universe let alone the solar system etc. etc. Ancient Wisdom is almost an oxymoron.
Your 'Argument from Authority' is a fallacy. Regardless of how many smart, or popular, or rocking celebrities and luminaries regard the book as truth does not prove the truth of the book. It's not an endorsement any more than all the terribly awful and stupid people who regard it as truth is proof that the Bible is false. I trust you understand that many many more stupid and ignorant people believe and believed in the truth of the Bible than brilliant and smart people. I would not want to use the average IQ of the last 2000 years to determine the proof of the book.
I like your doubts about some of the elements in the book. Most Christians refer to these passages as metaphor (a convenient dismissal). It's impossible to live inside a Fish, or wrestle an angel, or have a global flood. The Ark wouldn't be large enough to carry 2 of every insect species let alone 2 of every species... but the people who wrote this ancient story (actually they plagiarized OLDER flood myths from the same part of the world) did not know the breadth of life on God's earth did they?
The bible makes me wonder for sure, I still enjoy reading it, it's frustrating, but it's a beautiful book at times. Thanks for posting Scott.
Mark, you said: "I would think that if Christians really read the book as the word of God they may do as their told by their nasty desert God and murder anyone working on the Sabbath, or cover the head of any woman going to church amongst many other silly prohibitions."
ReplyDeleteHow much do you know about Christianity? Christians follow the New Testament (also called the New Covenant). We do not follow the rules of the Old Testament. The Old Testament, or more specifically, the Abrahamic and Mosaic Laws, are obsolete. You might raise the above statement with a practising Jew but you can not do so with a Christian. Hebrews 8:13 says, "By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear." The reason Christians continue to follow the Ten Commandments, however, is because they are reinstated in the New Testament by Christ Himself. It should further be noted that Jesus made it quite clear that stoning was no longer acceptable, in His demonstration with the woman caught in adultery. He said, “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.” Of course they all had to walk away. He then said to the woman, “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.”
You said: “The idea that the Jesus story is historical is simply a difficult claim to make. Not only do the gospels have discrepancies among the 'eyewitness' accounts (eyewitness meaning written 200-300 years after the alleged events).”
First, of course there will be discrepancies amongst eyewitness accounts. A group of people will see things literally from different angles and will remember some details and not others. But when you piece the four Gospels all together, for example, they do not contradict each other, we just find more or less information in each one; putting together a fuller picture as a whole. Second, where do you get the idea that the accounts were written 200-300 years after the fact? The four Gospels were written within 30-50 years of Jesus' resurrection, by the eyewitnesses themselves, namely, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. :) http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom
You said: “Even Jewish archeologists have almost universally accepted that Moses never lived . . . ”
Here is a detailed article about whether or not Moses wrote the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) or whether it was written by multiple, unnamed authors: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/06/28/did-moses-write-genesis
Here is a detailed article about whether or not Moses wrote the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) or whether it was written by multiple, unnamed authors: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/06/28/did-moses-write-genesis
ReplyDeleteYou said: “The bible has been re-written and edited from the Council of Nicea to our modern 'Red Letter' versions. Books have been added and removed (Gnostic Gospels), new translations have mistranslated certain words and terms.”
Making the words of Jesus highlighted in red does not change the meaning of what he said, so I fail to see how this statement has any relevance. Secondly, the reason there are multiple “versions” of the Bible and many modern ones continuing to come out, is because our language is continually changing and evolving. Many words from thousands of years ago are now archaic. Most people would find it very difficult to understand the King James Version, for example, because it is written in old english like Shakespeare. The point is that when you compare the modern versions to one another and with the old, with all the different paraphrases and specific words, you'll find that the meaning of each verse/passage has still been carefully retained. Bibles translated for tribal people can be especially difficult, due to either very small vocabularies or large ones that use words or metaphors quite differently than we do (for example, using the “bowels” to describe what we would attribute to the “heart”) but it is accomplished nonetheless, and the message is retained. It can be quite informative to compare references and glean a deeper understanding by reading a verse in several different ways. If you want to see what a truly revised Bible looks like, you can read the Jehovah's Witness Bible or the Koran – there you will see that the meanings of verses are not simply paraphrased, they are changed to create an entirely different message. But all that aside, the original scrolls, the original Greek and Hebrew, still exist for scholars who wish to delve deep.
Mark, you said: “Most Christians refer to these passages as metaphor (a convenient dismissal). It's impossible to live inside a Fish, or wrestle an angel, or have a global flood.”
ReplyDeleteWhy would a metaphor be a “convenient dismissal”? Jesus spoke in parables all the time. A parable is a metaphor with a moral lesson. So even if all the Old Testament Bible stories could be proven to be metaphors, it would not negate the message. For example, Scott mentioned Noah in the belly of the whale. Many Christians take this story literally but it has been said that at the time a part of the ocean, black as midnight, was referred to by sailors as “the belly of the whale.” It was a metaphor for a treacherous part of the sea. Perhaps Noah drifted on a log for three days in that stretch of sea, expecting to drown or be eaten. Is the message of the story somehow lost if we think he wasn't literally in the belly of a whale but was only figuratively in one? Not at all. :) And this alludes to your statements about Ancient wisdom being an oxymoron because they supposedly believed the earth was flat and such. We tend to make sweeping statements about the ancients, thinking them a bunch of fools and ourselves so wise and informed. But we forget that knowledge is built upon knowledge. We aren't smarter than them, we just have taller building blocks.
Consider this: In the Middle Ages, the “Almagest” by Ptolemy was viewed as an authoritative book on astronomy in Europe. Ptolemy said that the earth is but a mathematical point in the solar system and that the distance to the stars are at even greater distances in solar system. It is really a myth today that everyone thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe and all that jazz. Sure, there were probably many who had erroneous beliefs on that front but again, nothing that negates the truth behind a statement. Even if a disciple, for example, thought that the earth was flat (though where's the proof of that?) it would not mean that his statement that Jesus was God in the flesh was also false. That's a non sequitur.
Wow...isn't it nice we can all get along?!
ReplyDeleteHey Rebecca, thanks for taking the time to respond. Here are a few points in the order that you presented them.
ReplyDeleteI know what a Christian is, but most Christians are very different from each other. Most Christians use the whole Bible to pick and choose from, the whole faith based opposition to homosexuality constantly references Leviticus. Many Christians attempt to use the old testament to prove the Messiah was prophesied, etc. etc. The bottom line is the reason there are so many schisms, breaks, variations and splits in the Christian church is because EVERYONE has a different view of what a Christian is and should be. Some would view this as further proof that none of them are right, and others view this as a good enough reason to kill fellow Christians (see Ireland). Debating Christians is always fun because it's always different, it's amazing what they believe or don't believe or choose to believe, every Christian is a snowflake. So I think I know them about as well as anyone else can claim to. Let me guess, you're idea of Christianity is the 'right' one though... what a shock, that's exactly what Fred Phelps thinks too.
As for the New Testament replacing the Old. That's not the case at all. Jesus is very clear that he is there to fulfill the law (Matthew 5:17) not destroy it. He clearly has no interest in destroying the Mosaic laws. He was an outsider for sure, that was why he was killed, but he doesn't throw out the Old Testament. He even did various things to ensure he would fulfill Old Testament prophecy like riding a donkey into Jerusalem. Jesus was not an enemy of the Old Testament. Your story about the stoning of the woman caught in adultery is touching but has been conclusively proven as a very late addition and this story does not appear in the earliest versions of John's gospel. Again, further proof the Bible is not a reliable document.
Here is a link to a Christian Apologetics site regarding the age of the Gospels. None of which were written within the lifetime of Jesus none by eyewitnesses.
http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-whom
The earliest most scholars claim is 70AD for Matthew which is about 40 years after the alleged death of Jesus. My comment on it being 200-300 years after the fact is due to the editing that took place on and before 325AD at the Council of Nicea.
Again I'm using biased Christian evidence to prove my point, and you link me to 'Answers in Genesis' one of the most offensively unscientific sites in the known universe.
You'll notice we are using the same point of reference, and this reference states very clearly that the 4 gospels were very likely not written by the eyewitnesses. If you are using 'Answers in Genisis' as a point of reference you will never learn anything other than dogma, so if you expand your search even a little bit it's instantly clear that the historical record of the Old Testament and it's authorship is not really in dispute from a scholarly point of view. Moses did not write it, this has been known for centuries. The Jews were not enslaved in Egypt, the Jews did not wander in the desert, people did not live for 800 years, the flood did not happen. These are easily debunked and no serious theologian claims they are true.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to misunderstand my comment about the bible being edited and translated. I never claimed colouring Jesus' words red changed their meaning. I imagine the meaning was changed when the book was first translated into English (or Greek, or Hebrew). To believe the book has not suffered fundamental changes only stands to reason if you believe that God somehow intervened. Any book that is 2000 years old written through various languages and translated by opportunistic clergy (who were an elite literate class onto themselves) will suffer changes. A well known mistake is the mis-translation of the word 'Alma' meaning Maiden, not Virgin... adds a spin to the whole Virgin Mary thing. Here is a link from yet another Christian:
http://goddidntsaythat.com/tag/alma/
The author still has faith AND he admits there were lots of mistranslations in the bible. It's not controversial.
A metaphor is a beautiful thing, often containing more meaning and depth than a detailed explanation. It can be used as a convenient dismissal when it is used as a convenient dismissal. Have you not noticed that Christians take the bible literally in some parts and metaphorically in others? Have you not noticed the variety in which verses are used in this way? Have you not noticed that there isn't official doctrine on which passages were 'real' or which were metaphorical to help a studious Christian figure out what parts to believe actually happened and what parts didn't? That was my point, it's literally convenient and metaphorically convenient to quote the bible.
Mark, you said: " Debating Christians is always fun because it's always different, it's amazing what they believe or don't believe or choose to believe, every Christian is a snowflake."
ReplyDeleteDoes it come as a surprise that Christians would be snowflakes? :) Aren't all people of all cultures and religions unique individuals? It's one of the great things about humanity. Christians are no different when it comes to individuality. We all come from varying backgrounds, upbringings and experiences, and this colors our worldview and interpretations. It's to be expected. If Christians were a class of automata, all identical, all perfect, all interpreting the same, I think people would be just as turned-off by that as they currently are by Christians' hypocrisies and differences. There seems to be this idea that Christianity can only be true if all Christians are the same and all interpretations the same. I don't buy that. Even the disciples had disagreements. God made us that way. As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. :)
You said: "Let me guess, you're idea of Christianity is the 'right' one though... what a shock, that's exactly what Fred Phelps thinks too."
This has the ring of an ad hominem attack. But you seem very convinced in your own opinion that Christianity is false. i.e. you feel *your* view is the "right" one. So what point are you making here other than that people believe their opinions? :) I don't claim to have all the answers, I'm just sharing my view, as you are.
Mark, you said: "To believe the book has not suffered fundamental changes only stands to reason if you believe that God somehow intervened."
ReplyDeleteDo I believe God has preserved the Bible over the past 2,000 years? Yes, I do. Are some translations more accurate than others? Definitely. Are some words mistranslated? No doubt. The Bible has been translated into so many languages, this is inevitable. But is the original text preserved? I believe, yes.
There have been Christians over the millenia who have grossly misinterpreted the Bible. But they make the classic mistake of falling to the left or the right. The Bible is full of balance. In order to commit atrocities in the so-called name of God (like the Inquisitions, for example), many verses had to be completely ignored. This is buffet-Christianity to the extreme. Or the Catholic and Protestant feuds you mentioned in Ireland. Anyone who is a true follower of Jesus Christ can not justify murdering people in His Name - to do so is violate everything Jesus said about turning the other cheek and loving our neighbors as ourselves.
Mark, you said: "Have you not noticed that there isn't official doctrine on which passages were 'real' or which were metaphorical to help a studious Christian figure out what parts to believe actually happened and what parts didn't? That was my point, it's literally convenient and metaphorically convenient to quote the bible."
ReplyDeleteAgain, this is to be expected because Christians (and all people) are snowflakes (to use your word). :) I can't see the Bible having a whole lot of substance if it was entirely literal or entirely figurative. My view is that it is both. But as you say, how on earth do we know which verse is which? Who's to say? And this is indeed one way in which Christians in history have at times made dogmatic assertions which are not inline with the heart of God.
Things are further complicated by the fact that some verses may not be one or the other - but both! :) I personally find it delightful. I love the mysteriousness of the Bible. To read and study and pray and research and wonder is this literal or metaphorical? is just an endless wealth of mental stimulation for me. Now, you may think I'm wasting my time studying a book of fairy tales but I believe that the Bible is really the Word of God. As a finite human being with normal intelligence, it would be presumptuous of me to think that I could decipher the Bible perfectly myself. Even scholars get it wrong.
In short, what I'm saying is, if the Bible was inspired by God, it will be full of literal and figurative language, probably greatly interspersed at times, and each reader is going to be biased toward one of the other. That's why you have John Calvin on one hand and John Wesley on the other. Do Christians make errors in their interpretation of the Bible? Absolutely. I wouldn't have it any other way! :) But as I've mentioned before, it would be a non sequitur to say that because Christians sometimes misinterpret Scripture, Jesus must therefore not be God.
Which brings me to my final point. You are quite convinced that the Bible is fabricated and mutilated, and you likely have many books and websites to prove your claims. But here's the thing. On every given subject of controversy, there are public relations (PR), and you will find extremely detailed and convincing PR to support either side of the coin. This is not limited to Christianity. What I would like for you to consider is that if Christianity is actually true, then there will undoubtedly be scores and wreaths of PR against it. And in order for PR to be believable it will be written by the intelligentsia. I will not refute what you've posted to discredit the Bible because I know that you will always find convincing PR to support that stance, just as I will always be able to find convincing PR to support my stance. At the end of the day, you and I are both taking a leap of faith. My leap of faith is to trust and believe that Jesus really is the Son of God and that He really died on the cross for my sins. Your leap of faith is to believe that the entire universe evolved blindly by chance. I know you feel science is on your side. Be careful that you do not allow science to be a false god in your life. Continue your search for the Truth, but remember that if Lucifer is actually real, He is clever enough to create extremely convincing propaganda - and here's the hitch: God has allowed him to do so.
Hi Scott. :) You said, "Wow...isn't it nice we can all get along?!"
ReplyDeleteI didn't realize Mark and I were quarrelling? I thought we were having a civil discussion about differing views. :)