Christianity QA

Question:

From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC. All direct interventions by God in human affairs related therein can only be suspect from a civil historical perspective. Judaism being the first instituted monotheist religion, the origin of the monotheist religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam could only have existed after the Babylonian Exile.

Response:

From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC.

You must have gotten that rubish from a modernist writing 100 years ago.  That sort of nonsense is not even held by God-hating liberal scholars. RG

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC. All direct interventions by God in human affairs related therein can only be suspect from a civil historical perspective. Judaism being the first instituted monotheist religion, the origin of the monotheist religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam could only have existed after the Babylonian Exile.

That some will say that Scriptures existed prior to the Babylonian Exile, but the existing Scriptures, history, may have been paraphrased, deleting the name of Ashera, keeping only that of YHWH or adding an adjective to El such as in the name of El-Shaddai, the Almighty.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC. You must have gotten that rubish from a modernist writing 100 years ago.  That sort of nonsense is not even held by God-hating liberal scholars. RG

That sort of nonsense is of my own and it may well be held by some liberal scholars who for some reason will not make their views public. I have planned this intervention for the last two months. I am in no way surprised that you would hate a liberal scholar who would have the gutts to express his views. Your Sola Scriptura slogan is taking a dip Raul. You can debate your doctrines but you cannot meet me on my own ground. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC. You must have gotten that rubish from a modernist writing 100 years ago.  That sort of nonsense is not even held by God-hating liberal scholars.

I wouldn’t agree with Ahiaram said, but perhaps instead of responding the way you did, you could actually refute him with substantive reasoning and facts. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – RG

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC. All direct interventions by God in human affairs related therein can only be suspect from a civil historical perspective. Judaism being the first instituted monotheist religion, the origin of the monotheist religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam could only have existed after the Babylonian Exile. That some will say that Scriptures existed prior to the Babylonian Exile, but the existing Scriptures, history, may have been paraphrased, deleting the name of Ashera, keeping only that of YHWH or adding an adjective to El such as in the name of El-Shaddai, the Almighty.

There is a Christian and I think Judaic tradition that claims that Moses wrote the Torah. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – From a historical point of view, references to religious events, to religious event accounts in the Bible, dating prior to year 600 BC can only be allegoric. There is no historical proof that an instituted religion which worshipped the God of Abraham, the God of Jesus existed prior to 600 BC. All direct interventions by God in human affairs related therein can only be suspect from a civil historical perspective. Judaism being the first instituted monotheist religion, the origin of the monotheist religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam could only have existed after the Babylonian Exile. That some will say that Scriptures existed prior to the Babylonian Exile, but the existing Scriptures, history, may have been paraphrased, deleting the name of Ashera, keeping only that of YHWH or adding an adjective to El such as in the name of El-Shaddai, the Almighty. There is a Christian and I think Judaic tradition that claims that Moses wrote the Torah.

Yes there is that tradition and it is important to hold and maintain the Jewish Faith but the Jewish scholars know well that it is not so. I don’t know if like the Jews, we should continue our traditional teachings about the Bible as we have done so far. The council of churches once voted against the idea but there is a danger and that danger may be that the fundamentalist way of teaching may become more and more vulnerable to attacks. It already is and will become worst. In religion you cannot tell stories such as that of SantaClaus expecting that its veracity will not be questioned. If a Christian was to discover by himself that what he was taught was not the thruth he will turn against you. With my way of thinking, my interpretation of the Bible, i could easily have become an Atheist and i cannot blame Atheists for thinking the way they do because we are the first ones to be blamed for their atheism. Now you know why i call such expressions as "Word of God", "Bible Innerancy" and "Sola Scriptura" slogans for that is exactly what they are, just slogans, be it from Catholics, Baptists or Presbyterians. If such an expression as the "Word of God" is said in respect, it is not a slogan but a sign of respect for the Holy Scriptures, the NT in particular. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I wouldn’t agree with Ahiaram said, but perhaps instead of responding the way you did, you could actually refute him with substantive reasoning and facts.

He’s the one making ridiculous assertions not me. Let him cite evidence and scholars that support his position, it’s not my job to refute the existance of UFO’s either, if you believe in ‘em you prove ‘em! RG

Response:

I wouldn’t agree with Ahiaram said, but perhaps instead of responding the way you did, you could actually refute him with substantive reasoning and facts. He’s the one making ridiculous assertions not me. Let him cite evidence and scholars that support his position, it’s not my job to refute the existance of UFO’s either, if you believe in ‘em you prove ‘em! RG

Your reference to UFO’s is out of place Raul and you well know that. I am hitting a nervous cord here and i know that i am. You search the web and tell me if there has been an archeological find of verses of the Tanach written before 600 BC. I am the one who claimed that religious events and accounts of those religious events cannot be proven from a civil historical point of view and if such old verses of the Scriptures were to be found, you would be surprised of the content you believe would be exactly as those you read. The historicity of those religious events cannot be proven and are but glorification of historical events that have been altered to suit a religion, therefore they can only be allegories and it is that expression, this word  "Allegory" that really do hurt you. You will turn my posts into ridicule but you are at a lost to give some suitable answer because you cannot use the Bible against me nor against my posts. You cannot teach this old monkey how to make grimaces. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Raul – read a book mate! At least you owe it to your kids to try You do it a bit like reading the Bible but you don’t have to believe everything in it – you are allowed to consider, compare, personally evaluate and even reject it. It all comes with the price! New concept of a book? You can do it with TV too (so long as it isn’t a religious* channel) – or even – dare I say it? – talkback radio shock horror!! * – Unless its Muslim Jewish or Hindu

Let me further complicate the debate and refer to the Bible. I have been searching the adjective or word Sabaoth in the NKGV and in the Latin Vulgate. In the NKJV two expressions are used; Lord of Sabaoth and Lord of Hosts. I have been asking myself why would the translators add the word "of" while the Vulgate reads Domine, Dominus, Domini, or Deum Sabaoth? Then i have been asking myself another question. Is there any indication in the NT that the name YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, Yaveh or any other similar names attributed to the God of the Hebrews that could have been a name for the God of Jesus. Could the God of the Hebrews be the God of Jesus. My questions are pertinent to the debate and are posted in case one of you may happen one day in your life read about scripture texts dated before 600 BC. I thought of a name and that is Yahweh-Sabaoth in preference to El-Shaddai, Lord of Hosts or of Sabaoth. That composite name is of the highest honour and is far more appropriate as a name for the God of Jesus and of all Christians. It is without ambiguity. Now let me read someone that will turn this post into ridicule and another one who can answer it with wit and honesty.

Response:

     "Which of course is impossible – one      must only read Deuteronomy 34"      If the Bible is inspired of God …as      it claims…

===PLEASE, Por Favor, Per Favore, Bitte schoen, etc., tell us WHERE does the Bible claim that?

Response:

There is a Christian and I think Judaic tradition that claims that Moses wrote the Torah.

Which of course is impossible – one must only read Deuteronomy 34  5

Related Posts