Why I should believe?

    • kiromanAAKK
      kiromanAAKK
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.10.2009 Posts: 4,022
      Does the Shroud of Turin clear all the doudt about Jesus resurrection?

      Also, is the Bible a reliable historic document?

      Please, give out your opinion!
  • 141 replies
    • vanderveen89
      vanderveen89
      Bronze
      Joined: 03.04.2011 Posts: 54
      I'm a Deist, so I believe both those questions are null.
    • purple16
      purple16
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.05.2011 Posts: 102
      I'm also deist. First question: I don't know. Second : muslims believe Bible has been changed, although I don't think so.
    • Bendafatman
      Bendafatman
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.07.2008 Posts: 211
      http://carm.org/can-we-trust-new-testament-historical-document

      it says it all! :)

      quote:

      Many people do not believe that the Bible is a reliable document of history. But, the fact is the Bible is very trustworthy as a historical document. If we were to look at a chart that compared the biblical documents with other ancient documents, we would see that the Bible is in a class by itself regarding the number of ancient copies and their reliability. Please consider the chart below:

      (click link to see chart!)
    • Dragar
      Dragar
      Bronze
      Joined: 09.09.2008 Posts: 2,214
      Bible is a metaphoric story book...... nothing more
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      Apparently the shroud of Turin is just a hoax, so I wouldn't get too excited.

      And yes, the bible is reliable :D carm.org is not however ;)
    • ihufa
      ihufa
      Gold
      Joined: 18.03.2008 Posts: 3,323
      Because if you don't you'll rot in hell for eternity :) :)
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      It's interesting that the idea of hell as a fiery place of torment is not a scriptural one.

      "Hell" comes from the Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word hades, and literally means "the common grave of mankind".

      This is just one example of the lies propogated by sites such as carm.org and supposed "Christians" in general.
    • ihufa
      ihufa
      Gold
      Joined: 18.03.2008 Posts: 3,323
      isn't it funny how dozens of religions way before the bible was written have the exact same story with the virgin birth resurection etc?
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      By this you mean you've watched Zeitgeist and blindly trust all the information without any secular research?

      Also, you know what the HUGE irony behind that is? Jesus wasn't BORN on the 25th of December! =) Only in the pagan version. And yes, Christmas is a pagan festival.
    • Atoks
      Atoks
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.06.2008 Posts: 1,354
      I don't post much here recently but this is the kind of thread I can't not post in (major leakage!!!).

      I have a problem with christianity and some other major religions because historically they've been used to abuse and gather wealth and influence over people. While I'm sure the bible proves to be at least somewhat reliable to certain historical events, the history created after the bible became better known and spread suggests that it is more a tool to attract and gain people to subdue, control or even exploit and oppress them. There is proof that parts of the bible were changed and other parts were even omitted entirely. To me this is a negative sign. While the original message may not be lost entirely, I would prefer to have the entire picture available in order to be able to make my own mind. As for relics, it may be possible that some still exist but it seems they are more often "made up" to serve a purpose, than actually being a part of what they are meant to represent.

      I respect religion and people's personal choices about their religion. As long as they don't harm others it's hard for me to see any bad in them. However today's religion(s) seem more like organizations full of secrets and outdated principles that try hard to hold on to whatever influence and resources they might still be able to attract. To me this is not what religion is about. The way religion(s) used to (or in some cases still do) combat science and the progress of humanity is (for me) indicative of desires for keeping the people close to the "truth" they teach and spread no matter how deluded it may be in some ways. Religion is based on believing, but personally, the more (reliable and proven) information I have the more I believe. Everything is possible but I will never accept the argument that I should blindly believe and reason with religious truths when some have been responsible for so much needless pain, suffering and oppression in human history. I doubt any kind of a worth god would appreciate that.
    • NightFrostaSS
      NightFrostaSS
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.10.2008 Posts: 5,255
      Originally posted by ihufa
      isn't it funny how dozens of religions way before the bible was written have the exact same story with the virgin birth resurection etc?
      must be true then
    • MrMardyBum
      MrMardyBum
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.03.2009 Posts: 2,206
      Originally posted by Atoks
      I don't post much here recently but this is the kind of thread I can't not post in (major leakage!!!).

      I have a problem with christianity and some other major religions because historically they've been used to abuse and gather wealth and influence over people. While I'm sure the bible proves to be at least somewhat reliable to certain historical events, the history created after the bible became better known and spread suggests that it is more a tool to attract and gain people to subdue, control or even exploit and oppress them. There is proof that parts of the bible were changed and other parts were even omitted entirely. To me this is a negative sign. While the original message may not be lost entirely, I would prefer to have the entire picture available in order to be able to make my own mind. As for relics, it may be possible that some still exist but it seems they are more often "made up" to serve a purpose, than actually being a part of what they are meant to represent.

      I respect religion and people's personal choices about their religion. As long as they don't harm others it's hard for me to see any bad in them. However today's religion(s) seem more like organizations full of secrets and outdated principles that try hard to hold on to whatever influence and resources they might still be able to attract. To me this is not what religion is about. The way religion(s) used to (or in some cases still do) combat science and the progress of humanity is (for me) indicative of desires for keeping the people close to the "truth" they teach and spread no matter how deluded it may be in some ways. Religion is based on believing, but personally, the more (reliable and proven) information I have the more I believe. Everything is possible but I will never accept the argument that I should blindly believe and reason with religious truths when some have been responsible for so much needless pain, suffering and oppression in human history. I doubt any kind of a worth god would appreciate that.
      Excellent post, sums up the way I feel perfectly, but I wouldn't of explained it any where near as well.
    • Blade90
      Blade90
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.10.2008 Posts: 135
      Religion is harmful to mankind, just like nationalities and other bs.... Ok, back to grinding :D :D
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      Originally posted by Atoks
      I have a problem with christianity and some other major religions because historically they've been used to abuse and gather wealth and influence over people.
      Agreed, "religion" is a force for evil in this world.

      Originally posted by Atoks
      There is proof that parts of the bible were changed and other parts were even omitted entirely.
      The dead sea scrolls and other findings indicate that the modern day bible is actually extremely close to the original. In fact, it's pretty surprising how little it's changed when you do some research.

      There are some recorded cases of small tamperings, for example the catholic church modifying particular verses in support of the trinity, but no larger sections have been omitted or changed. The biggest affront to the bible was the removal of God's personal name which used to appear around 7k times.


      Originally posted by Atoks
      I will never accept the argument that I should blindly believe and reason with religious truths when some have been responsible for so much needless pain, suffering and oppression in human history. I doubt any kind of a worth god would appreciate that.
      Correct, you should never blindly believe anything. As poker players we understand the value of having complete information.

      And it's true, some horrible things have been done in the name of religion, the crusades, the inquisition, etc.

      But should you discredit the bible just because of the actions of evidently misguided individuals?
    • Atoks
      Atoks
      Bronze
      Joined: 01.06.2008 Posts: 1,354
      Originally posted by w34z3l


      But should you discredit the bible just because of the actions of evidently misguided individuals?
      Yes. If these individuals have no problems exploiting, oppressing and even taking life, which (supposedly) is the ultimate sin, how can you be sure, the messenger (aka the bible) has not been tampered with? I doubt everyone was "misguided" as you put it. Recent history (backed by research and documents) proves the Vatican was involved with some of the most hideous crimes against humanity during the second world war. I'm sure if reliable documents existed and were available it'd be possible to prove even more atrocious behavior. You are letting these "misguided" people off very lightly by calling them misguided.

      As for the dead sea scrolls I will copy a part of the wikipedia article:

      The biblical manuscripts from Qumran, which include at least fragments from every book of the Old Testament, except perhaps for the Book of Esther, provide a far older cross section of scriptural tradition than that available to scholars before. While some of the Qumran biblical manuscripts are nearly identical to the Masoretic, or traditional, Hebrew text of the Old Testament, some manuscripts of the books of Exodus and Samuel found in Cave Four exhibit dramatic differences in both language and content. In their astonishing range of textual variants, the Qumran biblical discoveries have prompted scholars to reconsider the once-accepted theories of the development of the modern biblical text from only three manuscript families: of the Masoretic text, of the Hebrew original of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around 100 CE.

      link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls#Significance_to_the_Canon_of_the_Bible
    • jbpatzer
      jbpatzer
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.11.2009 Posts: 6,944
    • w34z3l
      w34z3l
      Coach
      Coach
      Joined: 03.08.2009 Posts: 13,295
      Originally posted by Atoks

      You are letting these "misguided" people off very lightly by calling them misguided.

      Their actions have no legitimate scriptural basis hence they are "misguided".

      If the bible commands you to "love your neighbour as yourself", and you go off committing atrocities in the name of the bible, does that demonstrate an inherent problem with the bible?

      It's interesting that you mention the Vatican. The Catholic church are a prime example of an entity who claims to be backed by scripture, but in reality do whatever they like. They actually demonstrate a blatant disregard for bible teaching and create doctrine however they see fit. When this same entity starts committing atrocities does this demonstrate an inherent problem with a book they weren't even following in the first place?

      Originally posted by Atoks
      As for the dead sea scrolls I will copy a part of the wikipedia article:
      link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls#Significance_to_the_Canon_of_the_Bible
      Even in the passage you quote it acknowledges that "some" are practically identical to the traditional text. And by "some", I imagine it means "most", but the disposition of the author has to be called into question when considering this type of source; I've noticed a lot of bias in some of wikipedia's articles depending on the personal views of the author.

      Regardless, you would not really expect any of the text to still be identical if it had been propagated solely by mere humans. (That's the point I was trying to make.)
      Also going from your source it appears the offending documents are largely in one of the caves, cave four. It's highly possible these could have been placed there at a different time. Even if not, it doesn't prove much , since the caves also include apocryphal works which were never included in the bible canon.

      Anyhow, I will research this further. Thanks for the link.
    • kiromanAAKK
      kiromanAAKK
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.10.2009 Posts: 4,022
      Im strongely disagree that the Shroud is a fake as it has been well dimostrate that instead it is an original. What I mean, that piece of cloth has really keeped a person dead by crucifission etc.

      We are talking of real scientific tests; in fact, all the modern tests on it hav demostrate how amazing is that the negative image impress on the tissue cannot be explain and more important, it is not possible for people (but even today, btw) of that time to make such impression.

      For the rest, Im strongly agree (and Im a religious person, that believe in God, Jesus, etc.) that the Bible is not everything. What I try to say is that imho we have been robbed and there is much more about that we dont know.
    • ro1chwvd
      ro1chwvd
      Bronze
      Joined: 25.11.2009 Posts: 122



      :f_biggrin: