That scientists are proving more and more things in the Bible. Or that the Bible is also a great work of Literature, it contains every type of literary style. Or it is a History book, it has survived from the ancient times until the present day with total accurate portrayal of historical events? It's not just a religious book, and definatly NOT a fairy tale.
2006-09-20
16:48:28
·
35 answers
·
asked by
creeklops
5
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I did not say TOTAL ACCURACY< I said total accurrat portrail of EVENTS, theres a difference.
I'm just asking if they will stop saying it's a fairy tale or fiction, when it clearly isn't. I'm not cramming anything down anyones throat. And most literature books are boring.
2006-09-20
17:12:02 ·
update #1
tjnstloui...:a bit touchy there? I'm just asking a question, if you have a problem wih it, I'm sorry. But, I'm tired of athiest and non-believers calling my Bible a fairy tale, when it's been prooven otherwise.
I'm not asking them to believe it or anything like that. Just that it's not a work of fiction.
2006-09-20
17:20:36 ·
update #2
I never said I was cool : I have done my research, maybe you should do some, if you do have a brain.
2006-09-20
17:22:38 ·
update #3
You're right there are many scientists that believe in the bible see -
www.answersingenesis.com.au
2006-09-20 16:54:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
As a Hindu and a person who enjoys reading all sacred-texts as well as ancient and classical writings I have always enjoyed reading the Bible. Scientists are proving a lot of things that many sacred texts have eluded to for centuries...including the Bible. The sacred texts just had a different way of symbolically saying what science can now say with facts.
The Bible does contain history and presents a very good portrait of some historical events (like all sacred texts it does add it's religious, philosophical, mythical, and symbolic overtones to the accounts). The Bible is a good work of literature in that it contains a great deal of various literary styles (but not all of them).
I classify "fairy tale" as a very different type of story (a story in which it is set in some magical or mythical place that does not exist and has characters that aren't real and events that never happened). Sacred texts aren't this. They tend to be mythical. "Myths" come in two types. The first type is that they explain something philosophical, moral, etc using symbolism. The second type of myth is taking an actual historic event and then adding symbolism, embleshments, and usually other aspects to add a philosophical, moral, etc set of teachings in the story itself.
Two examples using two sacred texts:
The Bible mentions in Genesis where Joseph, a Hebrew, is taken to Egypt and after a series of events (which teach moral lessons and touch upon philosophy) that are explained using symbolism, by the end of the story the Hebrews have migrated from Canaan to Egypt (because of drought). Now historians say that there is historical proof that Hebrews did indeed migrate to Egypt and there is some evidence that there might indeed have been a drought. The name mentioned in the Bible as Joseph's Egyptian name is also historically mentioned. So take an Egyptian name which may or may not have been a Hebrew person, too, and the historical migration from Canaan to Egypt because of drought and then just add in the mythical aspects to teach the lessons the spiritual leaders would have wanted to emphasize in telling it.
The Mahabharata (which is approximately twenty times longer than the Bible) contains in it the Bhagavad Gita where it talks about the Battle of Kurukshetra. There is evidence that such a battle took place at Kurukshetra (it's a real place, too), that some of the people named in the Mahabharata were in fact real people. Then from all this real stuff add all the other mythical elements to make the philosophical and moral teachings the spiritual leaders would have been emphasizing.
And that's just in two books, there are millions more (the Avestas, Agamas, Sutras, Guru Granth Sahib, Koran, and so on and on and on from the various religions).
2006-09-20 19:13:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by gabriel_zachary 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Atheist believe...There is no “Divine Purpose” for Human existence. Evolution has no ultimate objective other than the survival of the species. People are simply the product of an evolutionary process which has given them a large brain and self-awareness.
Agnostic (Non-believers)...An agnostic thinks it impossible to know the truth in matters such as God and the future life with which Christianity and other religions are concerned. Or, if not impossible, at least impossible at the present time.
Where do those that believe there is a higher being fit into your idea? Are they wrong too?
To try and answer your question, since there never will be a yes or no. Atheist...in general probably not. As with anything else there are going to be a few that change. Same follows with Agnostics. I am not going to say the bible is a fairy tale. But I want you to question one thing...how do you know what you read in that book is what was exactly written? Before you get your undies in a bunch, hear me out. The bible wasn't written in English. How many times has it been re-written and translated to fit a language? There are certain words that will never translate into a language. Therefore there is change. Maybe it has survived in some sense but with change. Most of American people think that Jesus was a white man, that can't be either. Check your history. Just not possible. The current dominant opinion among secular historians and scientists is that he was most likely a bronze-skinned man, resembling modern-day persons of Middle Eastern descent. We see white because of years of our Art. In Africa they see Jesus as a black man. What did the bible say...thats right it didn't. Weather you decide to see the bible as a piece of history, literature, or a fairy tale...it comes down to each persons beliefs. To ask when will everyone believe the same...Never.
I study and believe Spiritualism, which means I believe in Infinite Intelligence.
One last thing for you to ponder....no matter what their belief is why is it when people are in a life and death situation do they always say oh god help me? Do they then suddenly believe? Or are they calling to anyone or any higher power that might help them?
2006-09-20 17:22:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by misstigeress 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
No, because people who are actually using their brain cannot accep false statements:
1. Try to find other sources than some pseude scientific intelligent design websites and you will discover that actually more and more 'things' in the bible are disproven.
2. Every literary style? Just for starters go to this site: http://www.questia.com/library/literature/literary-styles-and-movements/ and start checking off the styles you find in the bible. I am sure you will have a hard time with German Romanticism, Beat Generation, Arthurian Romance, Political Novel, and a few others.... I am sure you will find plenty of Absurdism, though....
3. A history book with accurate portrayals of historical events? Try those for starters: 1. Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?
God did (2 Samuel 24: 1)
Satan did (I Chronicles 2 1:1)
2. In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?
Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
One million, one hundred thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)
3. How many fighting men were found in Judah?
Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
Four hundred and seventy thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)
4. God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?
Seven (2 Samuel 24:13)
Three (I Chronicles 21:12)
5. How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26)
Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)
6. How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8)
Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9)
Hardly a historical source one could rely on to answer questions....
If you care there are 95 more here: http://www.answering-christianity.com/101_bible_contradictions.htm
4. It is not just a religious book? What else is it, since it is not a history book (see above), nor a science book - help me out here.....
5. It is not a fairy tale? I'll grant you that one, considering the patriarichal makeup of the bible, there really is no room left for fairies, although they would make a lot of the stuff in it way more believeable.....
2006-09-20 17:08:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by elwoodo0oo 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Because scientists (REAL ones, not Creationist think tanks) have NOT proven a worldwide flood, the existence of unicorns, explained how a human can survive three days in a fish's stomach, an exodus from Egypt to Canaan, any proof at all of the existence of Noah or his ark, the Akrk of the Covenant, or any physical evidence whatsoever that there was a crucifiction or a resurrection.
Any questions?
2006-09-20 20:00:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Scott M 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Oh with your so logical argument, I definitly want to change my faith now....
I don't have to accept anything. I'm much much happier being an Atheist than I was when I was religious.
You say that it's "history", but you know, even in American history, half of it is bullshit. And the bible has talking snakes and magic. Oh yeah, that's so much more reliable. Think about it, if you wrote a book that would be the guidelines of a giant population for thousands of years, no matter what it said, wouldn't you write it the way you think humanity should live. To make it more believable, you'd say God told you to write it. If anything, the bible is an old philosophy book.
2006-09-20 17:04:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Ok, calm down. The Bible is the record of faith of many, many people who tired to discern what is required of those who desire relationshgip with God. Some is historical, some is not.
You can't expect non-believers to accept something they do not regard as authoritative. The Bible, for non-believers, falls into the realm of pre-scientific myth.
Science proves very little in the Bible, actually. Some places and people are probably verified, but the record of God's dealings with humanity cannot be verified.
Worry about yourself and let the non-believers worry about themselves. Treat everyone, believer or not, with compassion and love. That's the best testimony you can give.
2006-09-20 16:52:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by David W 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
You are totally incorrect.
There is no credible evidence to support any of the bible myths.
Example:
Millions of people believe King Solomon was a great Hebrew King who ruled over a mighty and wealthy Hebrew empire. They believe that because the Bible says so. But, here is the truth about the famous King Solomon:
"Secular evidence about a historical figure comparable to Solomon, reported independently from the religious accounts, seems scarce and so far no substantial evidence has been found. Various inscriptions have been found and excavations are continuing."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon
Amazing how one of the most legendary Biblical characters left no evidence of his existence, much less of his mighty empire. The bible is a book of mythology invented in the 4th Century by the Roman Empire to support their Universal (Catholic) Religion.
2006-09-20 16:53:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Left the building 7
·
6⤊
1⤋
No. I will accept that wishful thinking is making more and more scientific serious discoveries match facts from the bible, in a far-fetched interpretation of your own holy book. I still think the bible is a fairy tale, with a rather dull literary style, too.
2006-09-20 16:53:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
I don't think they'll ever prove the great flood or walking on water or talking donkeys and snakes or people changing into pillars of salt. Some things may be an accurate account of historical events but most things are just plain silly.
2006-09-20 16:54:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by tomleah_06 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
The bible is a great work of literature, but the history part is going a bit to far. Some things certainly happened, such as the life of jesus and the conflicts with the roman empire, but the rest of it has no proof to back it up.
2006-09-20 16:58:06
·
answer #11
·
answered by Shinkirou Hasukage 6
·
0⤊
2⤋