Is the bible still relevant today?

[Rainmaker]

Well why dont you educate me and provide me links to the passages where this is said?

Also why do you believe that what the Bible says is the absolute truth on this or any other matter?

A genuine question, but since you're so keen to dismiss a topic you clearly don't understand (as I said earlier), why not read the bible for yourself and then at least you'll know what you're refuting? If you honestly didn't have a clue about Revelations then perhaps an hour or two with a bible would prove interesting and you can then answer your own questions and form your own opinion with at least some basis in the scripture.

I started reading the ISV this week and although I find it rather tedious and contrary to my own experience in parts, it's still a wonderful work culturally and theologically. As such I continue to read it and have enjoyed doing so.

 

[bhavv]

I did read about a third of the bible (new testament). I got Bored, didnt learn anything, and cant remember anything that I read anymore.

I have no motivation or interest in reading boring books anymore.

 

[lttlejoe]

Quite agree with you Ittlejoe, the parables can be interpreted to be revelant to any society where there is inequality, even Richard Dwakins eutopia without religion, there would still need to be some form of rule or regulation, and the base message and teachings of most holy books fulfil this role.

Thanks HK ( makes a change from the usual slating I get for my non-religious views ).

I really don't think one needs to follow a religion to recognise that the contents of the Bible ( at least the parables etc) carry a positive message which is perfectly relevant to today's society.
Respecting one's fellow man hasn't really changed for thousands of years. Even if I suddenly 'discovered god', I don't think it would change my attitude towards others or the way I treat them!

 

[Rainmaker]

I do wish you'd stop editing posts, it makes the discussion twice as troublesome as it needs to be.

This depends on your definition and belief of what God is. I dont believe in your definition of God, and I do not believe that even if there was a God, that he / she / it could have any direct control on creating a human.

Isn't that the point though - again? By asking a question about Christianity's Jesus you automatically place the definition in the Christian court, as it were. If God exists but can't do the things we're talking about, or exert any control over the matter he created, then he's - by definition - not God at all. So again the point becomes somewhat moot.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Well why dont you educate me and provide me links to the passages where this is said?

Also why do you believe that what the Bible says is the absolute truth on this or any other matter?

Why don't you read the Gospels, so you know what you're talking about? Jesus talked more about judgement and hell than love, though I think money was actually what he talked about most.

If this thread is still going tonight, I'll post some actual references.

And the reason I trust the word of the bible is because I believe it is inspired by God, if not necessarily being his own literal words.

 

[Rainmaker]

I did read about a third of the bible (new testament). I got Bored, didnt learn anything, and cant remember anything that I read anymore.

I have no motivation or interest in reading boring books anymore.

Yet you ask so many questions about that book, and when your ignorance becomes plain to see, you ask others who COULD be bothered to learn to fill in the gaps for you. I hope you didn't complete your biology degree in a similar vein.

If you find it all so boring, and didn't learn anything - why on earth are you spending so much of your life discussing it from a self-admittedly ignorant viewpoint?

 

[Vonhelmet]

I did read about a third of the bible (new testament). I got Bored, didnt learn anything, and cant remember anything that I read anymore.

I have no motivation or interest in reading boring books anymore.

So why start a debate on it?

Maybe I have no inclination to argue with people who can't be arsed to even read the books they're decrying as irrelevant.

 

[bhavv]

I do wish you'd stop editing posts, it makes the discussion twice as troublesome as it needs to be.

I have a complete inability to proof read while I am typing, or see any errors without the red underline with the black text on a white new message background

And if I didnt edit, I would end up making 3-5 consecutive posts all the time.

I type and click submit far too much faster than I can think, its a huge problem on forums, and I end up needing to edit everything otherwise all my posts would look like they were made by a dyslexic cat, with several of them in succession one after the other.

Would you really like to see my already rather unpopular and dis-likable opinions presented in that way?

So why start a debate on it?

Because I can be curious as to why so many people follow and believe in what a book says, and why a lot of them say that if I dont believe or follow it as well, then I am going to suffer eternal torment.

 

[Rainmaker]

I have a complete inability to proof read while I am typing, or see any errors without the red underline with the black text on a white new message background

And if I didnt edit, I would end up making 3-5 consecutive posts all the time.

I type and click submit far too much faster than I can think, its a huge problem on forums, and I end up needing to edit everything otherwise all my posts would look like they were made by a dyslexic cat, with several of them in succession one after the other.

Would you really like to see my already rather unpopular and dis-likable opinions presented in that way?

Perhaps then spend a little longer contemplating your answer, and utilise the preview rather than submit function?

 

[bhavv]

Perhaps then spend a little longer contemplating your answer, and utilise the preview rather than submit function?

Yes I try that sometimes, but I dont like doing it everytime.

 

[Rainmaker]

Because I can be curious as to why so many people follow and believe in what a book says, and why a lot of them say that if I dont believe or follow it as well, then I am going to suffer eternal torment.

Which, in my eyes, is a perfectly legitimate enquiry. However that's not what this thread has been and that's not the questions you began by asking.

You began by arguing (not asking) from an admittedly ignorant - and incorrect - premise about the nature of Jesus and his divinity, and then when your argument was undermined you said 'Well I don't know, I didn't read the bible it was boring'.

You surely see how that crumbles your credibility and makes you look like a copy-pastea arguer with no intellectual podium on which to stand?

e: My turn to edit. I have to go out for a while, BBL. Just letting you know so I don't appear ignorant to your successive replies.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Fine. Go read the gospels and see what Jesus says about his return and his judgement, or just take my word that he says it will happen.

 

[Pate]

OP, how about you do your best to put aside your self admittedly strong feelings on the subject, and give the New Testament a read through. It's not long, and will give you an insight into the whole affair, allowing you to get a grasp of the situation.

 

[Scania]

No.

 

[bhavv]

Which, in my eyes, is a perfectly legitimate enquiry. However that's not what this thread has been and that's not the questions you began by asking.

You began by arguing (not asking) from an admittedly ignorant - and incorrect - premise about the nature of Jesus and his divinity, and then when your argument was undermined you said 'Well I don't know, I didn't read the bible it was boring'.

You surely see how that crumbles your credibility and makes you look like a copy-pastea arguer with no intellectual podium on which to stand?

e: My turn to edit. I have to go out for a while, BBL. Just letting you know so I don't appear ignorant to your successive replies.

Thats true, but then again since when do you need to be fully knowledgeable or educated on a particular topic to discuss it?

My Christian friends at uni actually encouraged me to debate their religion with them, even though I hardly knew nothing about it, but I quickly stopped when I asked one of them 'If what the bible says is real, then why does it assume that witches are real and that we must burn them?'.

Her reply was 'Where does the bible say anything about witches? I havnt read anything like that in the bible, find me where it says that and send it to me on messenger'.

So I pretty much though 'Oh herp derp, so I have barely even read the Bible, but here is a Christian who encourages me to debate it, but hasnt actually read it herself?'

So if christians can follow their religion without knowing much about the bible, which is quite a lot of them, then surely I can also critique it without knowing much about it too?

Oh, so theres a question that I can ask in this thread:

'If what the bible says is real, then why does it assume that witches are real and that we must burn them?'.

OP, how about you do your best to put aside your self admittedly strong feelings on the subject, and give the New Testament a read through. It's not long, and will give you an insight into the whole affair, allowing you to get a grasp of the situation.

Even if I did, I probably wouldnt be able to remember any of it. I cant even remember 5% of what I read from books. I wouldnt be able to read anymore than a single page of any book these days without feeling an overwhelming need to fall asleep.

 

[semi-pro waster]

I don't think you necessarily have to believe in it all to still be able to state that part of those books are still relevant today. There certainly are plenty of relevant lessons from the bible about human behavior in general.

Ok, I'm guessing you're agreeing with me here as I haven't said otherwise.

Then that means that God was a human. If the parental DNA was not that of God, then God was not Jesus's father.

It's already been pointed out but if you allow the predicate that God is a supernatural being then a) how do you know what their DNA would look like? b) how can you assume that they couldn't manipulate DNA to resemble anything they wanted - why would God be limited to "natural" laws? If you don't allow that predicate then the conversation stops as you've put in a limit that will nullify any possible discussion.

Thats true, but then again since when do you need to be fully knowledgeable or educated on a particular topic to discuss it?

My Christian friends at uni actually encouraged me to debate their religion with them, even though I hardly knew nothing about it, but I quickly stopped when I asked one of them 'If what the bible says is real, then why does it assume that witches are real and that we must burn them?'.

Her reply was 'Where does the bible say anything about witches? I havnt read anything like that in the bible, find me where it says that and send it to me on messenger'.

So I pretty much though 'Oh herp derp, so I have barely even read the Bible, but here is a Christian who encourages me to debate it, but hasnt actually read it herself?'

Logically from what she's said you can't assume she hasn't read the Bible, she said "I haven't read anything like that in the Bible". The statement isn't equal to "I have never read the Bible". If you'd sent her the passages then perhaps she'd have been able to help you interpret them.

So if christians can follow their religion without knowing much about the bible, which is quite a lot of them, then surely I can also critique it without knowing much about it too?

Oh, so theres a question that I can ask in this thread:

'If what the bible says is real, then why does it assume that witches are real and that we must burn them?'.

From a quick search words relating (loosely) to witchcraft are mentioned in 4 (?) passages in the Bible and it's quite probably a warning against people who commit evil acts against others rather than any specific indictment against witchcraft itself although "thou shalt worship no other gods" probably gets a look in somewhere along the line.

 

[RomanNose]

You stop arguing for once and watch this

 

[Rainmaker]

Still waiting for my brother to return my car ('I'll be there in a minute... ) so I'll chip in once more then come back later.

Thats true, but then again since when do you need to be fully knowledgeable or educated on a particular topic to discuss it?

To discuss it? No. But to debate it from a position extolling your viewpoint as correct? Yes, by definition. I know nothing about butterflies beyond the obvious, so although I could discuss them with those who do - in an attempt to learn - I couldn't ever debate such things because by doing so I'd be literally making up my viewpoint out of thin air and would soon be shot down. As you discovered.

My Christian friends at uni actually encouraged me to debate their religion with them, even though I hardly knew nothing about it, but I quickly stopped when I asked one of them 'If what the bible says is real, then why does it assume that witches are real and that we must burn them?'.

Her reply was 'Where does the bible say anything about witches? I havnt read anything like that in the bible, find me where it says that and send it to me on messenger'.

So I pretty much though 'Oh herp derp, so I have barely even read the Bible, but here is a Christian who encourages me to debate it, but hasnt actually read it herself?'

But I thought it was OK and entirely possible to discuss things without fully understanding them? Make your mind up!

So if christians can follow their religion without knowing much about the bible, which is quite a lot of them, then surely I can also critique it without knowing much about it too?

Excusing ignorance with ignorance does not intelligence or discovery make.

Oh, so theres a question that I can ask in this thread:

'If what the bible says is real, then why does it assume that witches are real and that we must burn them?'.

I assume you refer to Deuteronomy? I'd be interested in any answer to this too. As I said I'm not Christian and although I'm currently reading the ISV bible I'm no stranger to disagreement or lack of understanding of the text.

Even if I did, I probably wouldnt be able to remember any of it. I cant even remember 5% of what I read from books. I wouldnt be able to read anymore than a single page of any book these days without feeling an overwhelming need to fall asleep.

Hardly glowing testimony for a self-stated scientist and academic who likes to start arguments with others based on the fact that he admittedly doesn't understand what he's talking about. :/ That's not a dig, it's what you're essentially doing and saying. If you can comprehend so many forum pages, perhaps find a more interactive way to read up and learn about the topics you wish to discuss.

Off to chase up my brother now, the shops are going to be closed at this rate!

 

[Metalface Mark]

I want people to watch the documentary, so I posted it. Whether or not people want to discuss what it contains is up to them.

I still have a lot more of it to watch yet, theres 4 parts in total.



No not really, I wanted people to watch and discuss the program, and I dont want this thread in SC because I am not bothered about people having to seriously debate the topic.

You were very anti religion and having a go at Castiel, believing him to be coming from a religious point of view and mocking him for doing so as such this does appear to be a troll thread.

 

[Nitefly]

Yawn. Similar topics have been done to death recently, I can't believe this keeps cropping up and even more so that the same characters participate!