A point of clarity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2014, 07:19 AM
A point of clarity
Long time reader, first time poster.

If the events described in genesis, such as creation, are incorrect in how the known universe was formed, shouldn't all that follows be incorrect?
If it is believed that abraham and moses were fictional characters, does that not render their legacies fictional as well?
If the bible is to be used as a faith document and not a historical document, does that not render the entire piece as mythological by definition?
How can one believe JC existed if the only account of his life can not be considered historical?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 08:51 AM
RE: A point of clarity
Pretty much, Jesus died to pay the price for original sin- Romans 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
This ties the creation myth to the Jesus myth. if you don't have a basis to believe either, Christianity is dead in the water,

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 08:59 AM
RE: A point of clarity
Of which no basis exists, because no historical account of either event exists, in the context of the bible being a faith document.
Perhaps i have this wrong, but to have faith in a faith document is to have faith in faith for faiths sake?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gordon Blue's post
29-08-2014, 09:03 AM
RE: A point of clarity
(29-08-2014 07:19 AM)Gordon Blue Wrote:  Long time reader, first time poster.

If the events described in genesis, such as creation, are incorrect in how the known universe was formed, shouldn't all that follows be incorrect?

No, this is the composition fallacy. The bible can be wrong about gensis, but be correct about other things. Incidentally it isn't, but you can not conclude it from just the genesis account of creation.

Quote:If it is believed that abraham and moses were fictional characters, does that not render their legacies fictional as well?

Depends on what you mean be legacy. The descendants of abraham are the Israelites. They are real enough, even if Abraham wasn't real.
[/quote]

Quote:If the bible is to be used as a faith document and not a historical document, does that not render the entire piece as mythological by definition?

Google definition Wrote:a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining some natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.
synonyms: folk tale, folk story, legend, tale, story, fable, saga, mythos, lore, folklore, mythology
"ancient Greek myths"

Yeah, that seems to fit. I would agree with that.

Quote:
How can one believe JC existed if the only account of his life can not be considered historical?

Depends on what you mean by "historical". There are no first hand accounts of jesus. Paul claims to have a second hand account but he doesn't say much about the guy. The gospel writers never claimed to be the apostles whose name they wrote under and they give no justifications for their narratives.

Given what we know about the time of jesus, not jesus itself, it seems plausible and even likely that a messiah figure could have existed and created an enduring following. It seems unlikely that anybody who wrote about him ever knew him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Michael_Tadlock's post
29-08-2014, 09:14 AM
RE: A point of clarity
Thanks, you guys. i have pondered this for a while since that whole camel bone thing came out and the response was to treat the bible as a faith document and not a historical document. I always wondered how a religion based on supposedly established concepts could turn around like that. i suppose that's apologetics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 09:16 AM
RE: A point of clarity
(29-08-2014 09:03 AM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  Given what we know about the time of jesus, not jesus itself, it seems plausible and even likely that a messiah figure could have existed and created an enduring following. It seems unlikely that anybody who wrote about him ever knew him.

The process of creating the mythology of Jesus seems to have been repeated in recent times - John Frum

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
29-08-2014, 09:16 AM
RE: A point of clarity
(29-08-2014 09:14 AM)Gordon Blue Wrote:  Thanks, you guys. i have pondered this for a while since that whole camel bone thing came out and the response was to treat the bible as a faith document and not a historical document. I always wondered how a religion based on supposedly established concepts could turn around like that. i suppose that's apologetics.

The nature of the Bible as a work of historical literature has been known by all serious scholars for over a century.

Naturally the apologists have lots of hand-waving excuses; that's their job.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 12:49 PM
RE: A point of clarity
(29-08-2014 07:19 AM)Gordon Blue Wrote:  Long time reader, first time poster.

If the events described in genesis, such as creation, are incorrect in how the known universe was formed, shouldn't all that follows be incorrect?
If it is believed that abraham and moses were fictional characters, does that not render their legacies fictional as well?
If the bible is to be used as a faith document and not a historical document, does that not render the entire piece as mythological by definition?
How can one believe JC existed if the only account of his life can not be considered historical?
I think it does negate at least some things. For example, with Adam and Eve came original sin and therefore the need for a messiah. That is, the Christian messiah though because the original meaning of messiah was different as understood by Jews. But Christianity teaches that Jesus saved us from original sin and reopened the gates to heaven. If there was no original sin, then in my mind it follows that Jesus was no messiah.

Other events like Noah's flood or the exodus could still have happened though without inconsistency even with Genesis being complete fiction. So it wouldn't negate everything.

@DonaldTrump, Patriotism is not honoring your flag no matter what your country/leader does. It's doing whatever it takes to make your country the best it can be as long as its not violent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 02:20 PM (This post was last modified: 29-08-2014 03:49 PM by Chas.)
RE: A point of clarity
(29-08-2014 12:49 PM)Impulse Wrote:  Other events like Noah's flood or the exodus could still have happened though without inconsistency even with Genesis being complete fiction. So it wouldn't negate everything.

Well, except for those being demonstrably false, too. Drinking Beverage

The Bible could be entirely fiction and still contain truth. Many books do, e.g.
To Kill A Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, MacBeth, Harry Potter, A Canticle for Leibowitz ...

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 02:36 PM
RE: A point of clarity
(29-08-2014 12:49 PM)Impulse Wrote:  Other events like Noah's flood or the exodus could still have happened though without inconsistency even with Genesis being complete fiction.

Except that the story of Noah's flood is in the book of Genesis.

Laugh out load

I concede your basic point, though.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: