Some questions for Christians who accept evolution

[lesliedellow]

The inconsistent presentation of the God of the Bible comes across as the God of the people who redacted the OT books in Babylon heavily favoring their own place with God, elevating themselves above their own Semitic cousins of the region.

Any evidence of that? Even in those days there would have been multiple copies of the Old Testament books in existence, with no central authority around to ensure that they all contained the edited version.

Jesus rewrote the truth about the true character of his Father demonstrated in the living of his life.

There is no evidence that Jesus had trouble with the Old Testament, or the character of God as presented there in. For example:

"Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

It is perfectly true that revisionists want one and the same adjective to mean "eternal" in the second instance, but not in the first instance.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Education as far as what?

Having the best football team with a band that calls their cheerleaders by derogatory names?

Or an offensive coordinator arrested for child sexual abuse on campus?

Actually, I was talking about reading and writing -- but your evasion shows that you knew that.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The Bible has a fresh new meaning for each generation to discover how they are to live in their generation. A wise man learns from the mistakes of others. A fool is doomed to repeat them.

Does that mean it's reasonable to say that what was true for previous generations may not be true for the current one?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet he was fired ...

He deserved it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually, I was talking about reading and writing --

Actually you were talking about their colleges.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Actually you were talking about their colleges.

Sounds like their colleges were worse than ours -- imagine if the Bible actually meant places of learning!

 

[Colter]

Any evidence of that? Even in those days there would have been multiple copies of the Old Testament books in existence, with no central authority around to ensure that they all contained the edited version.




There is no evidence that Jesus had trouble with the Old Testament, or the character of God as presented there in. For example:

"Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

It is perfectly true that revisionists want one and the same adjective to mean "eternal" in the second instance, but not in the first instance.

Biblical scholars have been extrapolating errors, multiple authors, redactions etc. since they could present their findings without being persecuted and killed by the Church. Study the Documentary Hypotheses and the how and why we can conclude that the OT books in their current form date to the Babylonian captivity period or later. Also note that NONE of the actual secular history books of the Israelites that predate the captivity (and mentioned in the revised scripture books) have survived while the scripture books did.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Does that mean it's reasonable to say that what was true for previous generations may not be true for the current one?

I keep telling my wife that just about everyone in the Bible had more than one wife. She keeps telling me that is not for this generation.

 

[joshua 1 9]

He deserved it.

But sexual abuse is a time honored tradition at this school. What right does the federal gov have to tell a state school what they can and can not do?

 

[bhsmte]

But sexual abuse is a time honored tradition at this school. What right does the federal gov have to tell a state school what they can and can not do?

State schools get funds from the government.

 

[lesliedellow]

Biblical scholars have been extrapolating errors, multiple authors, redactions etc. since they could present their findings without being persecuted and killed by the Church. Study the Documentary Hypotheses and the how and why we can conclude that the OT books in their current form date to the Babylonian captivity period or later. Also note that NONE of the actual secular history books of the Israelites that predate the captivity (and mentioned in the revised scripture books) have survived while the scripture books did.

I am well acquainted with the documentary hypothesis thanks. I am also aware that it has been coming in for some criticism since the end of the last century.

The "secular history" books didn't survive because they never existed. Apart from the fact that the existence of God was simply taken for granted, and he would have entered into any discussion as a matter of course, the writing of such history as there was would need to have been motivated. If not for religious reasons, then, in the modern world, to attract the approbation of fellow historians.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Sounds like their colleges were worse than ours -- imagine if the Bible actually meant places of learning!

The word : Bible comes from the name of the city where that style of writing and learning began. Before Moses they mostly used clay tablets. Moses converted the old style over to the new style they were using at that time in Egypt.

 

[lesliedellow]

The word : Bible comes from the name of the city where that style of writing and learning began. Before Moses they mostly used clay tablets. Moses converted the old style over to the new style they were using at that time in Egypt.

The word "Bible" comes from the Greek Βιβλιον, meaning book, or Βιβλια, meaning library.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The word "Bible" comes from the Greek Βιβλιον, meaning book, or Βιβλια, meaning library.

The city was Biblos.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The word : Bible comes from the name of the city where that style of writing and learning began. Before Moses they mostly used clay tablets. Moses converted the old style over to the new style they were using at that time in Egypt.

And that has what to do with the conversation?

 

[Colter]

I am well acquainted with the documentary hypothesis thanks. I am also aware that it has been coming in for some criticism since the end of the last century.

The "secular history" books didn't survive because they never existed. Apart from the fact that the existence of God was simply taken for granted, and he would have entered into any discussion as a matter of course, the writing of such history as there was would need to have been motivated. If not for religious reasons, then, in the modern world, to attract the approbation of fellow historians.

The Annals of King David was one of a number of books mentioned by the Bible but did not survive.
1 Chronicles 27:24Joab son of Zeruiah began to count the men but did not finish. Wrath came on Israel on account of this numbering, and the number was not entered in the book of the annals of King David.

The Book of the Kings of Israel.

2 Chronicles 20:34 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Jehu the son of Hanani, who is mentioned in the book of the Kings of Israel.

 

[lesliedellow]

The Annals of King David was one of a number of books mentioned by the Bible but did not survive.
1 Chronicles 27:24Joab son of Zeruiah began to count the men but did not finish. Wrath came on Israel on account of this numbering, and the number was not entered in the book of the annals of King David.

The Book of the Kings of Israel.

2 Chronicles 20:34 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Jehu the son of Hanani, who is mentioned in the book of the Kings of Israel.

Quite right. There are many books mentioned in the Old Testament which we no longer possess. Doubtless there were a great many more that receive no mention in the Old Testament. So what makes them "secular history"? If the mention of a personal name in the title does, then presumably 1 Samuel is secular history.

 

[Colter]

The a

Quite right. There are many books mentioned in the Old Testament which we no longer possess. Doubtless there were a great many more that receive no mention in the Old Testament. So what makes them "secular history"? If the mention of a personal name in the title does, then presumably 1 Samuel is secular history.

The assumption is due to the titles of the books they were routine histories and not what we would call scripture.

 

[lesliedellow]

The assumption is due to the titles of the books they were routine histories and not what we would call scripture.

Given that they have long been lost, isn't it magical how you come to know exactly what they contained? And as for "routine history," you had better ask yourself what would have been routine in the context of that culture - which definitely was not post Enlightenment Europe.

 

[joshua 1 9]

And that has what to do with the conversation?

If you read the quote I was responding to the statement: "imagine if the Bible actually meant places of learning!"

So we were discussing the meaning of the word Bible. I avoided a discussion on the Phonecians (phonics) and what their contribution was.