The Bible as History The question of whether the Holy Bible is an actual historical account of what happened since the beginning of humanity, or merely stories that man has come up with over time has long been considered. Many choose to believe the Bible literally and take everything word for word. Others believe the stories in the Bible are a way of showing God’s love for us, but think of them as stories and lessons on how to follow the “way of God.” Others think the stories in the Bible are false, and have no basis in truth at all. Some people want to have a clear picture of what early Palestine was like without ever having reference to the Bible, and “this may be an equally one-sided approach as using the Bible [as] complete factual history” (Porter 16). More and more archaeological digs are uncovering tangible evidence that some of the stories in the Bible actually do have a factual basis.
Who decided which books should be added or taken out? Do we have all the books that we should have? Many ask these questions, but Christians are ill equipped to give an answer. For centuries, Christians have claimed that they have the absolute truth, are saved only by faith, and claim the Scriptures as inspired by God. In spite of these claims many Christians are not able to clarify the origins of what they place all of their faith upon.
Second part of the class, we learned about the Triunity of God. Trinity is not easy to believe, describe and to understand. With human thinking, we are incapable of fully understanding the triune nature of the infinite God. We cannot comprehend the power, love, and holiness that is present in such a being. However, God does want us to know of its existence though, and include many truths about the Trinity in Scripture.
Joshua Corpuz Isaiah Nengo Anthropology 1 April 22, 2014 Age Of Reason The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine is about how he believes in a religion or a god. Throughout the book, Thomas Paine talks about how religion is such as Christianity’s bible, doesn’t make sense. He argues that in the bible, the stories that is accounted for and written down are somewhat false. He doesn’t believe in some of the stories in the bible that everyone is deciding to believe. He doesn’t believe that the bible is credited to the word of god, but it is by someone who has just created their own stories and accounts the one and only Jesus Christ.
Around the age of fifteen, Franklin began to question the Bible causing his Puritan based background to quickly fade. He had started reading books written by Deists and began to question the truthfulness of the events in the Bible. These Deists authors combined religion and reason to believe in a creator whose presence is not demanded in their day-to-day lives. After his readings, he was not absolutely sure that the Bible was a revelation by God. He felt that the men who wrote the Bible were not directed by God in any way whatsoever.
1st Timothy Introductory Issues There is a lot of debate amongst scholars about who the author was of this epistle. Some scholars say that it was written by a “Paulinist” which is a follower of Paul who is to be one or two generations from the apostle Paul. Other scholars say that there are many stylistic differences such as; conjunctions, prepositions and pronouns. Many scholars made this argument to be a four pronged pastoral authenticity debate with; historical, stylistic, ecclesiastical, and theological questions about the epistle. Some scholars agreed on the fact that the historical arguments did not match up with the book of Acts but they do not understand how Acts can be used as historical reliability unless this letter was written after Acts which isn’t the case.
Then, was Jesus really a proto-Wittgenstein? Did he use parables as an obscure vehicle for speech which alone might bridge the gap for us between our languages and the mystical always outside of it? The Christian Bible, the Hebrew Scripture, The Muslim Koran - or any religion's sacred texts for that matter, will remain controversial but still important avenues for divine communication. Somehow all religious faith lies locked up in non-direct discourse. How, then, can we claim to "hear the word of God or gods," as many claim to do?
Another demerit is that Borg and Wright are not able to predict all of their arguments completely. Both of the authors have written a lot of books so the reader can also study other books as well. Another demerit of this book is that the Borg and Wright is that they avoid answering all the significant problems. The Borg is mostly simple than the Wright. In his chapter on Jesus, he explains that the person who think that the person who think that the world is in a circle cannot visualize that Jesus come back to the entire world at one time.
No one church or group decided what books would be included in the bible, but some stronger religious groups were able to overpower the smaller sects which resulted it a Bible that reflect the views of some sects which lead to the demise of smaller sects that supported other gospels and stories that were not included in the Bible. In addition to what gospels and stories made it into the Bible the interpretation of theses texts was also determined by the group that had the most power at the time. For example, the Arians had some very unique beliefs when it comes to interpretations of Jesus Christ. Manny of the Arians’ beliefs were not accepted by the church. Today the Arians are considered to be the losers in the battle for what would constitute orthodoxy in the medieval ... ... middle of paper ... ...ect, religion, or group that has more power will write history in the way they want that event or story to be viewed in years to come.
What people can bathe about is which that the most confusing thing about the Bible is that not a single word came from the hand of Jesus himself. The only problem is that Jesus can basically be made to do whatever people want him to do through the use of history. The routes to enlightenment and/or salvation are very different in their method because of the application of duty in, on and the complete lack of it within each other.