You know what I find so troubling about the Bible, especially the New Testament? It's the disciples' poor reporting of events. Of course I say this from reporter's point of view. Luke wrote the pharisees were taking the best seat among the synagogue. Where is the best seat? Front row or at a convenient corner?Why can't he describe it? Luke wrote a large crowd followed Christ to a house. How large was the crowd? How many people? 100 or 1000? Can't he give a figure? Luke wrote the Holy Spirit came upon the people. What's that? A beam shining down from heaven? A white dove flying by? **** it Luke! Tell us what that Holy Spirit is and I'll give you a Pullitzer Prize.
You see, Christians, I would forgive the disciples if they were inadequate in their writing, for they were no trained writers in the first place. But their inconsistence in their reporting that really get to my nerves. When they record what was said by Christ or the others, they can write down in full detail, word for word. But when it comes to events or places, they leave the picture blank in most cases. As if they were assuming that their readers would know it like a general knowledge, like how we need not explaining what is electric switch to classmates. As if the disciples were assuming that their writing was only meant for their generation. Did they even know that Christianity is going to be a great religion 20 centuries later?
I say John, the last living disciple of Christ who wrote the book of Revelation, was nearly a good reporter. But he should ask the leading angel if the beast rising from the sea was made of metal or living flesh. Answer from such question could mean a great deal to 21st century people.
Christians, your faith is based on what happened sometime in the past. It is therefore relavant if while trying to understand your religion you should also understand history. While trying to grasp the good teaching please do yourself a big favour -- understand the logics behind it, if there's any.
2007-01-11 20:19:36 · 7 answers · asked by Ayamkatek 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Excuse me mister, I am talking about the new Testament, not the old testament.
The old testament archaeological evidence is accurate, but not really the new testament because the new testament "archaeological evidence" will shook the foundation of christainty itself !!!
Is that clear ? Even right now there is an anceint aramaic letter discovered in year 2005 in Jeruslame which is from "beni meshiha" which says that "the sanhedhrin is accusing him of calling himself the son of god but the fact is he didn't".
2007-01-11 20:35:27 · update #1
Do you know the history of the your town and do you have any historical people that has done something for your town? Is that written in a book and do you believe it? if you do same thing about the Bible
What Religion are you?
God Bless You
2007-01-11 20:26:27 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Archeology alone is proving how historically accurate the Holy Bible is. Many events that occurred in the Bible have been discovered to actually have happened. For example the base of the Tower of Babel was discovered in Iraq. Also it was originally thought by scholars that Pontius Pilate was a fictional character but recent evidence has been discovered that he was a real man. Also evidence that Jesus Christ existed was discovered. Even ancient Egyptian records have confirmed many Biblical events.
Do your homeowrk next time before you attack something you know nothing about. Ignorance breeds hatred.
2007-01-12 04:28:33 · answer #2 · answered by Darktania 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Read John 14:15-31 and you will find out about about the Holy Spirit. And what is important in the New Testament is Jesus' teachings and the life He led and dying on the cross for our sins. If you want to understand the Bible more then you need to pray about it.
2007-01-12 04:35:36 · answer #3 · answered by tracy211968 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My faith as a Christian is based on the Person, my Lord Jesus Christ. My understanding of the Bible most importantly must come by revelation of the Holy Spirit. Jesus, himself shared the word of God as a revelation of Himself (Luke 24:27). Revelation is more important than natural understanding as far as the word of God is concerned.
2007-01-12 04:35:43 · answer #4 · answered by seekfind 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You need to understand the difference between American writing and Hebrew writing.
It is the Hebrew tradition that when you write a biography of someone's life, you ONLY include the events that really mattered, the "important" ones.
Americans, on the other hand, want every single little detail of a person's life, up to and including how many times they went to the bathroom.
What is important about Jesus is who He is, and what He did, and that's what they wrote.
And you go ahead and cling your "I am not satisfied of the poor quality reporting of the disciples" and tell that to Jesus when you see Him. You know what He's going to say to you?
Depart, for I knew you not.
2007-01-12 04:24:27 · answer #5 · answered by Last Ent Wife (RCIA) 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
>>As if the disciples were assuming that their writing was only meant for their generation. Did they even know that Christianity is going to be a great religion 20 centuries later?<<
You have put your finger on it. Yes to the first, no to the second.
2007-01-12 04:27:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
SO HOW OLD WAS MUHAMMED'S YOUNGEST WIFE
6? 9? 12? NONE OF YOU MUSLIMS SEEM TO KNOW.
WHY ARE THERE SUNNI'S? AND NOT ONLY SUNNI'S?
CLEAN UP YOUR OWN BACKYARD THEN COME AFTER US.
AT LEAST WE DONT HAVE THE MOST TERRORISTS DYING FOR A CHANCE AT A BUNCH OF VIRGINS.
ALLAH IS THE ONLY FARMER, AND MUHAMMED IS HIS PIG.
2007-01-12 04:34:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋