Question about the Bible

[berry120]

Basically, all four of the canonical gospels were written long after the life of Jesus, and are almost universally accepted as having a common source. The fact that there are four of them recording similar events doesn't add to their validity.

On the contrary, there's at least 2 separate sources which most scholars believe the gospel writers used as their main sources, with others coming into the mix as well for different gospels. That's definitely not a single common source. As for "long after" the life of Jesus, we're talking a few decades at most, not centuries...

 

[~Darkseeker~]

There are Christian Fundamentalists and Christian Moderates. Those that take every story in the bible as having happened literally, and those who accept them as metaphors or stories of moral guidance. Fundamentalists are the sort of Christian that gets my goat, their outlook is clearly wrong, like Foothead said the Catholic church have even accepted evolution.

I personally believe that everyone should independantly look at what's out there, and decide for themselves what they believe in. I also believe they should not only conform to one way of thinking and should not actively identify themselves as being a member of a certain denomination. Identifying yourself as say, a Baptist or a Methodist suggests that you're part of the Baptist/Methodist community and accept all the ideas that those priests share in church. Basically what I'm saying, everyone should identify themselves as either 'Monotheist', 'Polytheist' or 'Atheist' and take it no further. Who knows if it's God up there, maybe it's Allah... or even 13 odd million different ones.

Unfortunately this very rarely happens, as people who's parents are christian or are raised as christian will almost always be christian to some extent; Only being taught to think one way is worse than not being taught to think at all.

 

[foothead]

On the contrary, there's at least 2 separate sources which most scholars believe the gospel writers used as their main sources, with others coming into the mix as well for different gospels. That's definitely not a single common source. As for "long after" the life of Jesus, we're talking a few decades at most, not centuries...

Again from wikipedia.

The majority view today is that Mark is the first Gospel, with Matthew and Luke borrowing passages both from that Gospel and from at least one other common source, lost to history, termed by scholars 'Q' (from German: Quelle, meaning "source"). This view is known as the "two-source hypothesis".[30] The two-gospel hypothesis, in contrast, says that Matthew was written first (by Matthew the Apostle), and then Luke the Evangelist wrote his gospel (using Matthew as his main source) before Mark the Evangelist wrote his gospel (using Peter's testimony). John was written last and shares little with the synoptic gospels.

Basically, we don't know. Mark was used as one source, and the other(s?) is lost. The earliest gospel is believed to have been written 40 years later, around 70 AD. Most people were not literate back then, so it was likely passed around by word of mouth for those 40 years, which explains why the life of Jesus shares so many attributes with prevalent myths from the time. One common theory about "Q source" is that it was little more than a collection of quotations attributed to Jesus. This would explain the "gospel of Thomas" as well as a few other non- canonical gospels. Of course, there isn't a lot of evidence for this, but it fits quite well.

Basically what I'm saying, everyone should identify themselves as either 'Monotheist', 'Polytheist' or 'Atheist' and take it no further. Who knows if it's God up there, maybe it's Allah... or even 13 odd million different ones.

I wouldn't take it this far, but I agree with the idea here. Just saying Christian is probably best unless you completely align yourself with a certain denomination.

Oh, and I don't think people realize this, but Allah and the Christian/Hebrew God are one and the same. The religions just believe in different prophets.

 

[~Darkseeker~]

I would agree with that, I just to promote independent thinking, rather than being completely taken in by the words or teachings of only one perspective.

 

[superman22x]

Oh, and I don't think people realize this, but Allah and the Christian/Hebrew God are one and the same. The religions just believe in different prophets.

Not the same, similar though. Catholics believe in the Trinity, while not all other religions believe that Jesus IS God but rather just a prophet.

 

[foothead]

Not the same, similar though. Catholics believe in the Trinity, while not all other religions believe that Jesus IS God but rather just a prophet.

Christians and Moslems have different teachings, but it's still the same god they're worshipping. I get what you're trying to say though.

 

[superman22x]

So I was just talking to a friend of mine... She takes the Bible very literally, and basically says that anyone who doesn't is going to Hell. It hurts, she's Catholic as well, and basically says my beliefs aren't right. She broke up with me because of that. It doesn't make sense to me how people can have beliefs like that. That's not a God I want to spend eternity with. One that sends everyone to damnation and takes only a few in. Just doesn't seem right to me. Not at all...

 

[root]

take the message literally for a second.

Lets just say that there is a God, and there is an ever after, absolute eternity in paradise.

Basically all god is saying is spend a second to worship and you can live in eternal bliss. or don't spend a second to worship and you won't spend happiness in eternal bliss.

When people devote their lives to God, is it really that much of a waste? (the athiest says yes, as far as they are concerned, we only have precious moments, so don't waste any of them on imaginary friends, the theist says no. compared to an eternity of happiness, spending a whole life time is just a blink of an eye. it's not wasting time...)

There is an experiment done on Children, they are handed a marshmallow and told that they can either eat it now, but doing so will mean that they will not get any more. or they are told that they can hold the sweet for ten minutes, waiting ten minutes will mean that they get more sweets.

it's something crazy like 90% of people eat the sweets, (and thus get only 1 sweet), because they can't wait ten minutes.

humans are made to not think so far ahead in our base instincts.

the idea of spending say 90 years in complete devotion to God is unappealing because we all live in the moment.


I just saw a quote somewhere else that said.
for those who believe no proof is necessary
for those who don't believe no proof is possible

One that sends everyone to damnation and takes only a few in. Just doesn't seem right to me. Not at all...

it's all hypothetical, but would you rather that they lowered the bar? made it easier for people to "get in" to whatever heaven that there is?
where does the bar stop getting lowered?

What if you've lead a good life in complete devotion to God?
What if you lead a good life, but don't believe in God?
What if you've lead a mostly ok life?
What if you did a few bad things?
Is believing in God necessary?
How bad can the bad things be before you're too bad?

 

[superman22x]

take the message literally for a second.

Lets just say that there is a God, and there is an ever after, absolute eternity in paradise.

Basically all god is saying is spend a second to worship and you can live in eternal bliss. or don't spend a second to worship and you won't spend happiness in eternal bliss.

When people devote their lives to God, is it really that much of a waste? (the athiest says yes, as far as they are concerned, we only have precious moments, so don't waste any of them on imaginary friends, the theist says no. compared to an eternity of happiness, spending a whole life time is just a blink of an eye. it's not wasting time...)

There is an experiment done on Children, they are handed a marshmallow and told that they can either eat it now, but doing so will mean that they will not get any more. or they are told that they can hold the sweet for ten minutes, waiting ten minutes will mean that they get more sweets.

it's something crazy like 90% of people eat the sweets, (and thus get only 1 sweet), because they can't wait ten minutes.

humans are made to not think so far ahead in our base instincts.

the idea of spending say 90 years in complete devotion to God is unappealing because we all live in the moment.


I just saw a quote somewhere else that said.
for those who believe no proof is necessary
for those who don't believe no proof is possible



it's all hypothetical, but would you rather that they lowered the bar? made it easier for people to "get in" to whatever heaven that there is?
where does the bar stop getting lowered?

What if you've lead a good life in complete devotion to God?
What if you lead a good life, but don't believe in God?
What if you've lead a mostly ok life?
What if you did a few bad things?
Is believing in God necessary?
How bad can the bad things be before you're too bad?

I always thought EVERYONE got into Heaven, no selection, as long as we humbled ourselves when we got there. That's the way I understood the Bible.

 

[root]

I always thought EVERYONE got into Heaven, no selection, as long as we humbled ourselves when we got there. That's the way I understood the Bible.

Is that written into the Bible, I mean exactly like that?
The message from various religions isn't clear, (and to be honest it's made less clear by the Catholic church especially.)

Some churches say that you have to live a good life, you have to follow the various commandments and messages of the books in the Bible and all being well, if you're a genuinely good person then you'll go to heaven.
whilst others seem to say that you don't need to follow the bible exactly, or all it's commandments, just be a good person.

Whilst the Catholic religion goes with the repentance theme, do what you like whilst you're alive, then say you're sorry before you die and everything will be fine.
Without wanting to get Godwin's law involved too much, this supports the idea that Hitler is up there in heaven sitting right next to God because he said Sorry just before he died? (ignore the fact that he committed suicide, which is a mortal sin, you can't say sorry before committing a sin, and you can't say sorry when you're dead.)

also reminds me of a joke.
little boy wants a bike, so he preys that he'll get given a bike at easter, but he doesn't get one, so he prays for a bike for his birthday, but still doesn't get one, so he preys for a bike for Christmas, and STILL doesn't get one...

then he figures that's not how religion works. so he steals a bike then asks God for forgiveness.