The bible

[ThereisaGod]

I would like to ask the question why is the Bible not historically correct? Can someone in some detail tell me why it cannot be correct or where it is said to be contradictory and also where it has mistakes?
thank you.

[Annik]

Well, it's not historically accurate and the Gospels were written after Jesus' supposed death.

[ThereisaGod]

I know that they were written after but isn't that kind of self explanatory since his death was a fulfillment of prophecy. If it was written before there would have been no way to know that it was full filled. Also his death was what marked the actual start of the new law. This was first preached on the day of Pentecost. Some people dont realize that there is an old law and new law. Before there were the resources of of mass communication there was a need of miracles and things of that nature to spread the word. After Christ was born and grew he gave only them these gifts to prove he is real. After his death he was resurrected as was prophesied setting the new law standards. acts 2:38 - Then Peter said unto them, repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remissions of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. In being baptized we are baptized into Christ death and brought out to walk a newness of life (romans 6:1-9).

[pgrimes15]

I know that they were written after but isn't that kind of self explanatory since his death was a fulfillment of prophecy. If it was written before there would have been no way to know that it was full filled.

The parts of the NT that fulfill OT prophecies could indeed be just that - fulfilled prophecies.

Or it could be that the person writing the NT in the 2nd century had a copy of the Jewish Torah open in front of him, and was working his way through a ckecklist of prophecy fulfillments that he had to incorporate into his new tome since these things add weight to a new religion you're inventing.

Given these two alternatives, magic or human manipulation, I know what I would choose.

Also his death was what marked the actual start of the new law. This was first preached on the day of Pentecost. Some people dont realize that there is an old law and new law. Before there were the resources of of mass communication there was a need of miracles and things of that nature to spread the word. After Christ was born and grew he gave only them these gifts to prove he is real. After his death he was resurrected as was prophesied setting the new law standards. acts 2:38 - Then Peter said unto them, repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remissions of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. In being baptized we are baptized into Christ death and brought out to walk a newness of life (romans 6:1-9).

Most of this seems to be religious gobble-de-gook that would be of interest only to the fellow believers of your chosen religion. Try not to quote the bible as "evidence", and assume that most atheists on this forum are familiar with the basics of Xtianity - they just don't believe it.

Regards

Grimesy

[Minimalist]

I would like to ask the question why is the Bible not historically correct? Can someone in some detail tell me why it cannot be correct or where it is said to be contradictory and also where it has mistakes?
thank you.

Start here.... if you are serious.

http://www.worldagesarchive.com/Referenc...ers%29.htm

In the last quarter century or so, archaeologists have seen one settled assumption after another concerning who the ancient Israelites were and where they came from proved false. Rather than a band of invaders who fought their way into the Holy Land, the Israelites are now thought to have been an 'indigenous culture that developed west of the Jordan River around 1200 B.C. Abraham, Isaac, and the other patriarchs appear to have been spliced together out of various pieces of local lore.

And remember....it was xtians who insisted on the OT being a foundation for the NT. You can't build a house on a foundation of sand.

[Cato]

I would like to ask the question why is the Bible not historically correct? Can someone in some detail tell me why it cannot be correct or where it is said to be contradictory and also where it has mistakes?
thank you.

So you're ok with the earth being flat. Or the cure for leprosy involving a dead beard in an earthen pot over running water. Or the fact that your god inflicted livestock with boils that he himself had already killled. The fact that Jesus has two different lineages through a dude (Joseph) that didn't have the priviledge of the shag? Light created before the sun. The moon has its own light source. The laws of physics were suspended for the express purpose of extermination.

My reciprocal question is this...
How does an adult human being read the bible and not conclude that it is a collection of stories written by semi-savages? If I were the creator of the universe and took time to notice this particular book written in my name, I would immediately wipe all traces of the book and its believers (without a fucking flood, or paint on hinges) in an attempt to reconcile the insult.

What more detail do you require?

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

I know that they were written after but isn't that kind of self explanatory since his death was a fulfillment of prophecy.

Well no it wasn't, not even close. Perhaps go to the trouble of reading what the Jews actually believed about the Messiah and still do.

Also his death was what marked the actual start of the new law.

Umm,no,it wasn't:

Matthew 5:17-19

King James Version (KJV)

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

The Torah is an oral religious and political mythology of the Jews. Some of it was borrowed from other cultures, starting with their nasty little god.(Sumerian)

The Torah was not written down until the seventh century bce.

The earliest parts of the New Testament are the Epistles of Saul/Paul. it is reasonably certain that at least some of them are forgeries.Scholras tend to agree that the Epistles were probably written circa 50ce.

The Gospels are later, the earliest,that called 'Mark' about 70ce [at the earliest]


The Torah and the New Testament are religious texts, not history books. Neither set of books meet the standards demanded by historians for prime source documents.

One of the most basic demands made by historians is that evidence be contemporary with the events described. Neither the Torah nor the New Testament meets that simple demand. That means that no truth claims may be be made about ANY of those books. The very best one may do is speak of levels of credibility (none,mostly) and likelihood (most unlikely mostly)

Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence (Carl Sagan)

[Minimalist]

The Torah was not written down until the seventh century bce.

If then.

[Cato]

I know that they were written after but isn't that kind of self explanatory since his death was a fulfillment of prophecy. If it was written before there would have been no way to know that it was full filled. Also his death was what marked the actual start of the new law. This was first preached on the day of Pentecost. Some people dont realize that there is an old law and new law. Before there were the resources of of mass communication there was a need of miracles and things of that nature to spread the word. After Christ was born and grew he gave only them these gifts to prove he is real. After his death he was resurrected as was prophesied setting the new law standards. acts 2:38 - Then Peter said unto them, repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remissions of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. In being baptized we are baptized into Christ death and brought out to walk a newness of life (romans 6:1-9).

Look fucktard, perhaps if you would have spent more than zero seconds looking through the conversation on this site you would have immediately realized that we are not ignorant of the contents of the greatest selling book of all time. This is inuslting on many levels; hence, the fucktard invocation.

Your entire argument (aside from the idiotic Bible quotes) seems to rest on the fact that miracles were needed before the advent of mass communication. How else, beside ancient communication methods, were these miracles disseminated? For fuck's sake, this was a very stupid argument.

Go read the Bible front to back and get back to us. Chiming in with last Sunday's sermon is not impressive.

[Undeceived]

Start here.... if you are serious.

http://www.worldagesarchive.com/Referenc...ers%29.htm

Rather than point out every lie, I will refute only one, and thus gorge the credibility of the entire article:

The Davidic Empire, which archaeologists once thought as incontrovertible as the Roman, is now seen as an invention of Jerusalem-based priests in the seventh and eighth centuries B.C

http://teldan.wordpress.com/house-of-david-inscription/

Beware of articles that cite no evidence.