Science confirms the Bible?

[Rahul]

OK? Know of the five strands or the Yahweh + Asherah cult? Elohim?

Please continue, good sir.

[Polaris]

OK? Know of the five strands or the Yahweh + Asherah cult? Elohim?

Please continue, good sir.

First one shows that the Bible is a copy/paste of five different books during the Captivity...it's a real mess when you try and separate the different interwoven statements. Also explains why there are different accounts in the Bible like Genesis and the slaying of Goliath. That and there was a compromise for which Bible to use, but I think even Christians acknowledge that one.

There was a cult where Yahweh was depicted as having a wife goodness named Asherah, who is seen as one of the enemy faiths in the Bible. Some speculate that this was a precursor faith and the Jews went out of their way to remove it from history....I say it's more of a cult because it was only seen in one area to my recollection (even if they tried to eradicate it, they're likely be more than just one remaining evidence...aka we have four Mayan codices.

Elohim was the name for God used during the time of Abraham, but could also been seen as the name of a supreme Canaanite god....the implications being quite destructive to the origin of the Jewish faith.

[Rahul]

First one shows that the Bible is a copy/paste of five different books during the Captivity...it's a real mess when you try and separate the different interwoven statements. Also explains why there are different accounts in the Bible like Genesis and the slaying of Goliath. That and there was a compromise for which Bible to use, but I think even Christians acknowledge that one.

There was a cult where Yahweh was depicted as having a wife goodness named Asherah, who is seen as one of the enemy faiths in the Bible. Some speculate that this was a precursor faith and the Jews went out of their way to remove it from history....I say it's more of a cult because it was only seen in one area to my recollection (even if they tried to eradicate it, they're likely be more than just one remaining evidence...aka we have four Mayan codices.

Elohim was the name for God used during the time of Abraham, but could also been seen as the name of a supreme Canaanite god....the implications being quite destructive to the origin of the Jewish faith.

Interesting. They're are parts of the Bible that even today's version mentions other gods. Not naming them false ones, but actually speaks of them being the gods of non-Israel nations.

Would this not indicate that the monotheistic Judeo-Christian religion is simply built on ancient polytheistic religions?

[Polaris]

First one shows that the Bible is a copy/paste of five different books during the Captivity...it's a real mess when you try and separate the different interwoven statements. Also explains why there are different accounts in the Bible like Genesis and the slaying of Goliath. That and there was a compromise for which Bible to use, but I think even Christians acknowledge that one.

There was a cult where Yahweh was depicted as having a wife goodness named Asherah, who is seen as one of the enemy faiths in the Bible. Some speculate that this was a precursor faith and the Jews went out of their way to remove it from history....I say it's more of a cult because it was only seen in one area to my recollection (even if they tried to eradicate it, they're likely be more than just one remaining evidence...aka we have four Mayan codices.

Elohim was the name for God used during the time of Abraham, but could also been seen as the name of a supreme Canaanite god....the implications being quite destructive to the origin of the Jewish faith.

Interesting. They're are parts of the Bible that even today's version mentions other gods. Not naming them false ones, but actually speaks of them being the gods of non-Israel nations.

Would this not indicate that the monotheistic Judeo-Christian religion is simply built on ancient polytheistic religions?

Some would say so, but those gods were just of different cultures who the Jewish people would end up worshiping....my guess is that during some time periods, Israel was doing very poorly respective to her neighbors and the Israelites prayed to the gods of these other nations that were prospering.

[Rahul]

Some would say so, but those gods were just of different cultures who the Jewish people would end up worshiping....my guess is that during some time periods, Israel was doing very poorly respective to her neighbors and the Israelites prayed to the gods of these other nations that were prospering.

So you do not believe that the Bible is the unerring Word of God?

[Polaris]

Some would say so, but those gods were just of different cultures who the Jewish people would end up worshiping....my guess is that during some time periods, Israel was doing very poorly respective to her neighbors and the Israelites prayed to the gods of these other nations that were prospering.

So you do not believe that the Bible is the unerring Word of God?

It's not written in that tone....well maybe the earlier books, but certainly not what I label the historical books (Kings and Chronicles in particular) of the Bible.

[Rahul]

It's not written in that tone....well maybe the earlier books, but certainly not what I label the historical books (Kings and Chronicles in particular) of the Bible.

If the Bible is unreliable then how can you know whether you are doing everything right to follow God's will and go to Heaven?

[Polaris]

It's not written in that tone....well maybe the earlier books, but certainly not what I label the historical books (Kings and Chronicles in particular) of the Bible.

If the Bible is unreliable then how can you know whether you are doing everything right to follow God's will and go to Heaven?

I don't dismiss the Bible merely because it included additions that are not the word of God. Those additions are a saving grace to archaeology that would otherwise have disappeared tens of centuries ago had they not been treasured as a religious text.

Plus I stand by the New Testament as well. Less factual (well there are some corroborating facts that fit within the historical narrative, but I don't concern myself with them as I do with the OT), more spiritual.

[Rahul]

I don't dismiss the Bible merely because it included additions that are not the word of God. Those additions are a saving grace to archaeology that would otherwise have disappeared tens of centuries ago had they not been treasured as a religious text.

Plus I stand by the New Testament as well. Less factual (well there are some corroborating facts that fit within the historical narrative, but I don't concern myself with them as I do with the OT), more spiritual.

If an allpowerful God was giving his Word to people to get to heaven why would He allow it to become corrupted?

This would obviously cause many well meaning people to be led into falsehoods and eternal damnation.

[Mystical]

Thus causing more harm than good. Yep. See Rahul, you're less important than the minority who actually would make it to heaven, because without your rejection of the whole Bible, not just the uncorrupted parts, then "true Christians" can't be 'special' by overcoming the trials and tribulations of living amongst nonbelievers who are 'teaching' them how to trust in god more blindly.