Holy Bible

What is the Bible to YOU?

  • Offensive, and I dont want it pushed on me.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I know I should study more, so I can decide.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    14

P-NutLane

Guru
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Messages
454
Location
Texas
I'd like to get an idea of what Castefootballers think about the Holy Bible. These are the options I could come up with. Please tell me what you think if none of these options are how you feel.
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
I believe the KJV & Geneva versions are the closest to the original manuscripts. As they were given the the Saints/Apostles, the Word was indeed perfect & God given. However, I take issue with some of the "johnny come lately" versions which are inaccurate at best, and totally apostate (at worst).
 

jaxvid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Messages
7,247
Location
Michigan
Good choice of options on the poll P-nut, I think that sums up the way most people feel one way or the other.
 

guest301

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
4,246
Location
Ohio
The King James version is my Bible of choice. I take it literally except in the places it's clearly not to be taken as such. It is God's word and there is no other.
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
462
DixieDestroyer said:
I believe the KJV & Geneva versions are the closest to the original manuscripts. As they were given the the Saints/Apostles, the Word was indeed perfect & God given. However, I take issue with some of the "johnny come lately" versions which are inaccurate at best, and totally apostate (at worst).
I feel the same way. I was shocked when I looked into the original definition of some Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic words and saw how they were completely mistranslated into English. I think sometimes they have been mistranslated out of ignorance and sometimes to fit somebody's own personal beliefs or the political climate of the time. However, I also feel that it could be the case that the Bible was not meant to be taken literally. It was considered a noble skill at the time to be able to put a real historical figure into a fictional situation and accurately represent how he or she would have acted.Thus, I believe that may be the case with the Bible, but my personal belief is that the original text was either from eye witness accounts or inspired by God.Edited by: Fightingtowin
 

White Shogun

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
6,285
Fightingtowin said:
It was considered a noble skill at the time to be able to put a real historical figure into a fictional situation and accurately represent how he or she would have acted.

To what time period are you referring FTW? Do you have any sources where I can do some research on that subject?
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2008
Messages
462
White Shogun said:
Fightingtowin said:
It was considered a noble skill at the time to be able to put a real historical figure into a fictional situation and accurately represent how he or she would have acted.

To what time period are you referring FTW? Do you have any sources where I can do some research on that subject?
I believe it was a book by John Dominic Crossan called "The Historical Jesus," where I read that. The period he was referring to was the time of Christ. He's somewhat controversial because he doesn't believe the New Testament was meant to be taken literally, but a lot of it was instead symbolic, which upsets a lot of Christians. However, he has also made a popular wave of atheist historians trying to convince the public that Jesus never existed look foolish, which Christians like. If I remember right, he believes Jesus was a real historical figure and there is, by far, enough evidence to prove that, but a lot of the New Testament was stories created by his followers, which he said was an acceptable and understood practice. However, he also thinks the actual quotes of Jesus were almost all direct quotes and at one point were all compiled together into one document. However, my memory is a little foggy, so I might be off a little.

Like always, the atheists on one side and the Christians on the other seemed to be more concerned about proving their point than actual scholarship. However, he seemed pretty unbiased. However, what bothered me, is he completely dismisses the idea that Jesus could have done miracles because he said, as a historian, you can't rely on miracles to explain anything. As a Christian, I believe those miracles could have happened. I also believe that God inspired the authors to write literal stories about Jesus, however, once again as a historian, he said he can't rely on divine intervention to reach a conclusion.Edited by: Fightingtowin
 

whiteCB

Master
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
2,282
Can someone please explain to me why there is an "Old" and "New" Testament to the Bible? What was wrong with the Old Testament. Did they just all of a sudden feel like coming up with a new version? What the heck's the difference between the two and how many people wrote each one?
 

Observer

Mentor
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
523
whiteCB said:
Can someone please explain to me why there is an "Old" and "New" Testament to the Bible? What was wrong with the Old Testament. Did they just all of a sudden feel like coming up with a new version? What the heck's the difference between the two and how many people wrote each one?

This Wikipedia article is not a terrible starting point New Testament.
 

Colonel_Reb

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
13,987
Location
The Deep South
whiteCB said:
Can someone please explain to me why there is an "Old" and "New" Testament to the Bible? What was wrong with the Old Testament. Did they just all of a sudden feel like coming up with a new version? What the heck's the difference between the two and how many people wrote each one?


This is a joke right?
smiley5.gif
 

StarWars

Mentor
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
1,194
Colonel_Reb said:
whiteCB said:
Can someone please explain to me why there is an "Old" and "New" Testament to the Bible? What was wrong with the Old Testament. Did they just all of a sudden feel like coming up with a new version? What the heck's the difference between the two and how many people wrote each one?


This is a joke right?
smiley5.gif

WhiteCB the difference is Judaism vs. Christianity.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
1,248
Location
Illinois
I am a Roman Catholic. How am I expected to answer this?
 

Observer

Mentor
Joined
May 10, 2008
Messages
523
screamingeagle said:
I am a Roman Catholic. How am I expected to answer this?
You would be able to take the first choice, and then add a reasoned historical explanation of why these particular writings came to be compiled into a book the totality of which came to be considered as not only true, but Inspired.
 

whiteCB

Master
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
2,282
Thank you observer for the link. I'm not too astute on the whole religion thing.
smiley36.gif
Edited by: whiteCB
 

White_Savage

Mentor
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
1,217
Location
Texas
Thing to remember about the Bible...it does not say what alot of people will tell you it says. For instance, that a Christian cannot be race conscious.
 

moose

Guru
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
406
I am a christian and I am race conscious and I read the complete bible, the one the catholic church uses.
 

Freedom

Mentor
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
812
Location
Tennessee
Words, any words, are always symbols of ideas.
The Bible in its totality, and not just one verse here or there, is the infallible word of God.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
703
Over the course of my life I've had varying feelings/esteem toward the Bible. I assume that's typical for most ppl who struggle to understand God.
I wonder how CasteFootballers feel about polytheism (?) I understand as a Christian, I'm commanded to love God (singular) with all my heart.. but does that exclude the possibility of Christians believing in (not worshipping) the existence of multiple Gods (?)

I've thought about Genesis 3:22 over the years, where God, referring to Himself (and/or others ?) in the plural, comments on the status of Adam: 'Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil...'

I guess God could be referring to the Trinity, to an audience that at the time was ignorant of a triune God.. but it seems more like a candid insight into the author's instinctive belief in polytheism.. A belief that I'm not sure has been adequately discredited. Is there an eventual Biblical refutation of polytheism. Or does the Bible generally/simply set the God of Israel apart from other deities that could potentially be worshipped..

Genesis 1:26, 'Let Us make man in our image, in our likeness..'
 
Last edited:

Carolina Speed

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
4,582
Over the course of my life I've had varying feelings/esteem toward the Bible. I assume that's typical for most ppl who struggle to understand God.
I wonder how CasteFootballers feel about polytheism (?) I understand as a Christian, I'm commanded to love God (singular) with all my heart.. but does that exclude the possibility of Christians believing in (not worshipping) the existence of multiple Gods (?)

I've thought about Genesis 3:22 over the years, where God, referring to Himself (and/or others ?) in the plural, comments on the status of Adam: 'Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil...'

I guess God could be referring to the Trinity, to an audience that at the time was ignorant of a triune God.. but it seems more like a candid insight into the author's instinctive belief in polytheism.. A belief that I'm not sure has been adequately discredited. Is there an eventual Biblical refutation of polytheism. Or does the Bible generally/simply set the God of Israel apart from other deities that could potentially be worshipped..

Genesis 1:26, 'Let Us make man in our image, in our likeness..'


Yes. How many do you want? Old Testament: The first commandment states," Thou shall not have any Gods before me."

The second commandment, "Thou shall not make unto thee any graven images....Exodus, 20:3-4

New Testament:

Jesus said, " I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the father except by me."
John, 14:6

Of course God was speaking about the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. There are many references to the Trinity throughout the Old and New Testament! Jesus said, "before Abraham was born, I am." John, 8:58.

This is the basis for Christian belief. The Jews (many) in Jesus time on earth were blind to this. They couldn't understand, they were blind.

No other God has ever done for humanity what Jesus did. I would also like to add that Christianity isn't about "Religion", religion is what "YOU", have to do, Christianity is what Jesus did for "YOU". You can believe in "Religion" or you can believe in Jesus. Most people miss that!
 
Last edited:

Charles Martel

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Messages
8,364
The Bible is just Hebrew mythology.

I prefer Greek, Roman, Viking, Celtic and Slavic mythology.
 
American Freedom News
Top