Warrior General Games

Originally posted by The Walrus
I'm not calling you ignorant for questioning God, I think it is a mistake to think that the Bible could have been written by one person with an imagination. That is all I was saying.

You need to do some real research on the Bible and it's origin and check multiple sources. It was definitely not written by one person.

Nope, some of it (the flood story, for example) was actually stolen from some of the earliest known African historical folk tales. So definitely not plagiarized by just one person.

Originally posted by robelder
Originally posted by The Walrus

I'm not calling you ignorant for questioning God, I think it is a mistake to think that the Bible could have been written by one person with an imagination. That is all I was saying.

You need to do some real research on the Bible and it's origin and check multiple sources. It was definitely not written by one person.

That is exactly the point I was making, glad we agree.

Originally posted by Tigerbait0307
Originally posted by robelder

The question isn't about God, it is about whether people were real and also what does first hand account mean. It was a bad idea I'm sure. the point will be missed.

Just fing around. I completely agree with you. You can argue if he was the son of God. You can argue if the scriptures are exaggerations. But I agree that the Bible is a first hand account of Jesus's life written by his disciples.

I don't believe they are a TRUE First hand account if they are even a first hand account.

Originally posted by ShotPutNC
Originally posted by The Walrus

Ok, I just have to respond to something someone said awhile back. I'm not going to argue whether or not Christianity is true, I just want to say something about the Bible. A couple people said that the Bible was just written by one guy with a nice imagination, and that has got to be one of the most ignorant things a person can say. I've taken classes studying the literature of the Bible, and if it was just written by a single person a couple thousand years ago that class would have been much easier, but that's not the case.

Whether or not you believe in God, the fact is that archaeologists, and historians have confirmed that many of the people, places, and events recorded in the Bible are true. This comes from texts and artifacts outside of the Bible, and actually some ancient cities, lost for thousands of years, have been discovered by using descriptions in the Bible to locate them, and sure enough they were right there where the Bible said they would be. For a person to have made up everything in the Bible, they would need to have been nearly omniscient to know the existence of people and places that had not been discovered yet. So the historical accuracy of the Bible is very solid.

It just bugs me to hear people say that it was made up. That would be like someone saying that maps of the world were just made up by someone with a good imagination. We can go back and see the cites, and read documents and histories about rulers that the Bible makes references to. Just like we have cartographers and then satellites to show us what the world looks like.

There are plenty of things in the Bible that have not been authenticated, but they are mixed right in there with things have only been proved within the last 10-20 years. So if you are going to ridicule the Bible, at least make a better case than "uh... it was just written by some dude with a good imagination". I could say the same thing about maps of the world, but then we would both look like ignorant fools.

That however only makes it historically possible not necessarily accurate. We are not arguing about the religion itself and you should not take offense to it. We are only arguing about whether or not it is a true firsthand document. Which due to the time between the occurences and the writing of some parts of the bible, it cannot be considered a perfectly accurate document.

This
Heck, the character of Jesus is modeled after Ra, the Egyptian God. The Bible might be historically accurate but I believe that Jesus and all his mythical miracles are just a ripoff of Ra.

Originally posted by The Walrus
Originally posted by robelder

Originally posted by The Walrus


I'm not calling you ignorant for questioning God, I think it is a mistake to think that the Bible could have been written by one person with an imagination. That is all I was saying.

You need to do some real research on the Bible and it's origin and check multiple sources. It was definitely not written by one person.

That is exactly the point I was making, glad we agree.

Sorry, my eyes failed me!

Originally posted by jrry32


This
Heck, the character of Jesus is modeled after Ra, the Egyptian God. The Bible might be historically accurate but I believe that Jesus and all his mythical miracles are just a ripoff of Ra.

I think you got your Egyptian God's mixed up. I believe you are thinking Horus (son of Ra) or Isis. Regardless it is absolutely untrue.

Originally posted by fletch03
Originally posted by jrry32



This
Heck, the character of Jesus is modeled after Ra, the Egyptian God. The Bible might be historically accurate but I believe that Jesus and all his mythical miracles are just a ripoff of Ra.

I think you got your Egyptian God's mixed up. I believe you are thinking Horus (son of Ra) or Isis. Regardless it is absolutely untrue.

How are you to say it is untrue? It was so many years ago, no piece of evidence is 100% fact.

I hate when people say that something someone else believes is completely wrong when they cannot say for sure that they are right. You might believe Jesus was true, and the Bible was true stories, not made up. You cannot 100% say that. It could be a group of guys that wrote it together. Each one wrote their own stories, but they worked together for it. People can say what they think actually happened, and how they think it did, or what not, but you cannot at 100% fact say that the Bible is true.

I can say that the atheist who use the argument that Jesus was modeled after other god's isn't true. Much of this has been made up by atheist trying to find "proof" that the stories about Jesus are not real.

You are right though, that I can't not say without a shadow of a doubt say that the bible is 100% factual. But i believe it is. That is why they call it faith. Just like atheist can not say without a shadow of a doubt that there is no God. But they believe there isn't, and they have faith in that.

So either way it boils down to which do you have faith in: That there is a God? or That there isn't a God? I prefer to believe that there is a God, and that when I die I don't just turn into worm dirt.

He had a gun at my head and a knife in his hand..

You don't believe me, do you?

Originally posted by fletch03
I can say that the atheist who use the argument that Jesus was modeled after other god's isn't true. Much of this has been made up by atheist trying to find "proof" that the stories about Jesus are not real.

You are right though, that I can't not say without a shadow of a doubt say that the bible is 100% factual. But i believe it is. That is why they call it faith. Just like atheist can not say without a shadow of a doubt that there is no God. But they believe there isn't, and they have faith in that.

So either way it boils down to which do you have faith in: That there is a God? or That there isn't a God? I prefer to believe that there is a God, and that when I die I don't just turn into worm dirt.

Or you could be agnostic, not give a shit, and think all the devout atheists and devout bible-bangers are collectively fucked in the hed

Originally posted by haole
Originally posted by fletch03

I can say that the atheist who use the argument that Jesus was modeled after other god's isn't true. Much of this has been made up by atheist trying to find "proof" that the stories about Jesus are not real.

You are right though, that I can't not say without a shadow of a doubt say that the bible is 100% factual. But i believe it is. That is why they call it faith. Just like atheist can not say without a shadow of a doubt that there is no God. But they believe there isn't, and they have faith in that.

So either way it boils down to which do you have faith in: That there is a God? or That there isn't a God? I prefer to believe that there is a God, and that when I die I don't just turn into worm dirt.

Or you could be agnostic, not give a shit, and think all the devout atheists and devout bible-bangers are collectively fucked in the hed

Agree'd here. I am not straight up agnostic, but not atheist either. In the middle, more towards agnostic. But I agree