What religion are you?

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Canyarion

No no I'm sure there are enough proofs that Mathew and John wrote their own books... they were THERE with Jesus all the time.

And you STILL haven't explained the prophecies.

Uhm.. Matthew and John were not with Jesus. Matthew and John wrote the Bible well after Jesus's death. They were born after Jesus died (they were not one of the 12 disciples if thats what you think). It is obvious that people exaggerated stories. People back then were stupid.

No offense Canyarion, but I was taught this in school, and yes I go to a Catholic school, and last Religous class I had one of the best and smartest teachers I've ever known. I'd take his word over yours any day.

[Blade Runner]

Typhoid, if you're arguing about Jesus, for the sake of argument, we must assume their is a God.

Crono, the Bible is a compilation of books. These books were written all througout history. This includes before, DURING, and after Jesus' death.

SUPER EDIT: Crono I just saw your post about Matthew and John not being alive in Jesus' lifetime or even being his disciples. Where in the world did you get this info??? I dont' know what Bible you've been reading about but this information is extremely incorrect. And where do you get these ideas that the stories were exaggerated and that people back then were a bunch of dummies??

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Dylflon

I'd like to hear.

Through life experience and praying. I'd rather not go into details.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Blade Runner

Crono, the Bible is a compilation of books. These books were written all througout history. This includes before, DURING, and after Jesus' death.

I know that. But the Bible has also been through many translations and such since it was officially put together. It was first written in Greek I think, and then on to Latin. It was bound to have been altered from what really happened.

There are just so many possible ways that the Bible events we read about do not tell what really happened.

As far as I know, no one was following Jesus around with a pen and paper. In fact they didn't even have paper back then.

And the books that were written before Jesus' birth are hardly believable at all. Besides, that's old testament, it's mainly Jewish stuff.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Crono

I know that. But the Bible has also been through many translations and such since it was officially put together. It was first written in Greek I think, and then on to Latin. It was bound to have been altered from what really happened.

I doubt it would be altered all that much. But there is no way to know unless you had a time machine.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Blade Runner

SUPER EDIT: Crono I just saw your post about Matthew and John not being alive in Jesus' lifetime or even being his disciples. Where in the world did you get this info??? I dont' know what Bible you've been reading about but this information is extremely incorrect. And where do you get these ideas that the stories were exaggerated and that people back then were a bunch of dummies??

The Gospel writers weren't his disciples. I mean, they didn't write their own books. And I think the author of Luke and Acts was a Roman guy, not a disciple. I am quite sure of this. Seeing as the books weren't even written until 60 years after Jesus' death.

Where do I get these ideas? Do you really think a story would be the same after 2000 years?

Originally Posted by Blade_Runner

Er..what. they didn't have paper??? You really need to quit making things up. And the transcribing and translating of the Bible was done with such extreme precision and care that you should really research it sometime.

Yes, paper was considered a luxury. Did the average Joe have paper? No.

[Blade Runner]

Er..what. they didn't have paper??? You really need to quit making things up. And the transcribing and translating of the Bible was done with such extreme precision and care that you should really research it sometime.

EDIT: Found a little quote for you.

Some express concern that the Bible may have been altered down through the centuries. It is to this matter that Textual Critics address themselves. They have discovered entire manuscripts and parts of others, one portion dating to the beginning of the 2nd Century. The New Testament has far better textual support than do the works of Plato, Aristotle, Herodotus, or Tacitus, whose contents no one seriously questions. In addition, the New Testament documents have always been both public, and widely-disseminated. Thus it would be impossible for any party to have materially changed their contents, just as the Declaration of Independence, for example, as a public document, could not have been privately altered without raising notice and creating public furor. Sir Frederic Kenyon, former Director of the British Museum, comments:

"The interval between the dates of the original composition and the earliest extant evidence [i.e. our oldest manuscripts] becomes so small as to be negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed."

In conclusion, it is not necessary that the New Testament be treated with "kid gloves" and backed up by special pleading. Simply allow it to be subject to the very same historical-critical standards that Classical historians apply to secular literature. When equal treatment is permitted its course, the Gospels fully pass the test.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Blade Runner

Er..what. they didn't have paper??? You really need to quit making things up. And the transcribing and translating of the Bible was done with such extreme precision and care that you should really research it sometime.

EDIT: Found a little quote for you.

Where did you find that?

Think about before the bible was written when many things were still being passed on by word of mouth. Would these stories not have changed then? Maybe not in an extreme way, but they could have been changed regardless.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Crono

If women have earned the right to vote and be as equal as men in society, then the church should follow suit.

What about the separation of church and state?












(And in no way am i saying women arnt equal.)

[Canyarion]

Crono, I have to believe that Mathew and John weren't Jesus' disciples, just because your teacher said so?
Back it up man.

Originally Posted by Crono

Do you really think a story would be the same after 2000 years?

2000 years? Perhaps not. 60 years? Yes.

And IF you believe in God, don't you thnk that he would make sure the bible is correct? Being a God that can't lie and stuff???

[GameMaster]

Originally Posted by Canyarion

And IF you believe in God, don't you thnk that he would make sure the bible is correct? Being a God that can't lie and stuff???

God can't stop people from lying. It's all about the free will.

[Canyarion]

But this is his holy book we're talking about. Of course he can make sure that only the right people got to write and copy his book.

Anyway....

[Crono]

Originally Posted by Canyarion

Crono, I have to believe that Mathew and John weren't Jesus' disciples, just because your teacher said so?
Back it up man.

My teacher never said that. I said, or meant to say, they didn't write their own books. So how do we know the real authors wrote exactly what happened?

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by Crono

If women have earned the right to vote and be as equal as men in society, then the church should follow suit.

*Clears throaght*


*Yells*


What about the separation of curch and state?

[Dylflon]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

*Clears throaght*


*Yells*


What about the separation of curch and state?

What about it?