You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context

Did you attempt to analyse the Bible in a logical way though? I don’t believe in it personally, but someone I know is very adamant about being a Christian and thinks that the Bible essentially proves itself to be true.

The Bible is generally quite boring to read from cover to cover. A big part of the reason for this is that large sections of the Bible just tell you long family trees. The old testament also includes a lot of prophecies about Jesus and essentially what is supposed to happen in the new testament (if Jesus was really the messiah). Sections of the Bible like this aren’t necessarily supposed to excite you that much, but if you think of the Bible as one compiled historical document, you can check its internal consistencies and think about where information might be missing.

As an example, Jesus’ betrayer (who it wasn’t said in the old testament would specifically be Judas), was predicted to get 30 silver pieces for betraying him. This was a quite specific prediction, especially if you knew he would be dealing with Roman currency. It’s a bit like if we made up a new religion now and said that our messiah would appear in America and the betrayer would get $500. If that actually happened, it would be some evidence for our religion (or Christianity).

Of course we could say that 30 pieces of actual silver would have similar values across most (silver-backed) currency, which is unlike basically every world currency today. That might have been a reasonable prediction for what you would get for sending a criminal to be executed anyway. Also, we don’t really know if Judas actually got 30 silver pieces if we’re not gonna totally trust the Bible.

If you haven’t checked out any of the “cross-referencing” of the Bible and just think it’s an airy fairy thing about there being a God who performed miracles, then you’re denying the Bible from a lot less logical of a position than the Christian I know who is always banging on about this stuff to me to try and convert me.

As a side note, I believe there are a limited number of other historical sources relating to the time period of the Bible, although most of these would either be quite irrelevant or they would be deemed Satanic by Christians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

regarding the bible, an interesting presentation from a biblical scholar and former believer https://youtu.be/pfheSAcCsrE

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

If I was writing a fanfic sequel to the old testament I would call it the new testament and say that Judas was paid 30 silver.

I could write whatever I want. Most people back then couldn’t read, and these stories had been passed down for generations by word of mouth.

All the animals of the earth can’t fit on a wooden boat. There isn’t enough water to flood the planet. Mankind isn’t descended from two people. You can discredit the bible from early on, unless you just “because magic” it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

The new testament isn’t exactly a fanfic sequel though. It (and also the old testament) was written by multiple different people who claimed to witness (or prophesise) certain things and agree on a lot of them. You do make a good point though. If some or all of these people had studied the predictions in the old testament and lied or assumed certain details (all the writers of the new testament could have even conspired to lie to everyone), then some of the prophecies would hold very little weight, especially the 30 silver one.

If you consider the Bible to be a proper historical source that was compiled from books different people wrote about current events, then you probably should take at least some of the Bible seriously.

There are other predictions, like that Jesus would be descended from David, and supposedly the entire line of the family tree from Adam to Jesus has been kept track of. You probably don’t believe that’s accurate, but it’s easier to believe people kept track of the lineage from David. The Jews wanted to keep track of this stuff to see if the prophecies worked out.

The easiest way to convince a reasonably logical person to be a Christian (which I definitely don’t think would be reading random well-known Bible stories like the Book of Job), would be to show them undeniable evidence that Jesus died and rose from the dead. The Bible is quite short of doing that as far as I’m aware, but there are lots of other little predictions like that which could contribute evidence towards what the Bible says as a whole.

I think the vast majority of sensible historians looking into that time period agree that there was a person called Jesus that became (at least locally) quite famous for being a moral philosopher and claiming to be God or in touch with God in some way and his ideas spread across the world over time (some religions other than Christianity actually claim that Jesus was a prophet, but some of his teachings were corrupted and Christians shouldn’t be worshipping him the same way they do Allah or whatever else).

Also, the stories in the Bible were not passed down by word of mouth. They were copied by scholars and translated into different languages for others to read. This would suggest the original text of the Bible has actually been preserved.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I would argue the easiest way to convince someone to become a Christian (or any religion, seriously) would be if some sort of celestial being would appear and claim to be a deity, or an angel or something.

Something that would prove “magic” or rather, “we are so advanced from you that you don’t really have a choice in the matter.”

permalink
report
parent
reply

Of course, you could call into question the validity of different versions, or say there really should be only one version. If you’re a Christian, should you read the KJV, the NIV or something else?

I believe there were a few different lines of scholars. For example, the Bible was copied in the Vatican, but also by other scholars across the world. If you’re not gonna read the original (which is written in multiple ancient languages that scholars today don’t seem to have a full understanding of), then there are loads of English translations, and a handful of popular ones.

I think scholars actually understand the Latin translation used by the Romans a lot more than the original text. That one was also copied. Of course, translating the Bible seems to be a very dangerous business if you’re a Christian.

One of the very last verses in the Bible (Revelation 22:18) (and also 22:19) basically warns you’re gonna be cursed and go to hell if you edit the text of the Bible.

Meaning can be lost or added in translation, so you could say that if Christians truly believe the Bible is a holy text that shouldn’t be edited, they should all try to read the original.

This was a bit of tangent, but essentially what I’m saying is that cross-references in the Bible are valid evidence for the Bible. They’re not necessarily proof but they are evidence. If you were interested in what I’m saying, you could consider looking into the Book of Isaiah. The Christian I know who’s always telling me this stuff says it contains loads of predictions and some of them agree with other predictions made elsewhere. There are also some bibles (especially study bibles) that contain tables of these predictions and how they were fulfilled by Jesus (according to the books of the new testament).

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Mankind isn’t descended from two people.

Kinda.

The Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam are a thing. Admittedly, they probably lived about 100,000 years apart, but all mankind is descended from these two people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

That’s a big kinda.

But you know what I mean. Mankind didn’t start with one man and one woman. Mankind slowly came to be from another species that was similar to mankind, and somewhere in the history we called us humans and our ancestor something else.

permalink
report
parent
reply

You seem like you might actually have quite a detailed knowledge of evolution, especially very early evolution. I don’t know a huge amount of detail about the early evolutionary time periods.

My understanding is that for a long time it had to just be the primordial soup. That would need to create a self-replicating molecule, which was a very unlikely random event that advanced life was essentially waiting for.

Some Christians and probably other people could believe life didn’t originally come from this process. God could have created life and then let it evolve.

The mitochondria would have probably came in after this, and mitochondria being in cells does actually mean we can say that all eukaryotes had a common ancestor, because that was also a very rare event in the early stages. It could likely have happened to just one cell (at least the final stage of making cells with mitochondria), which is what I think you’re describing, but I might be wrong.

If we’re not interpreting the story of Adam and Eve literally, that could be the meaning. Adam and Eve were just a very early stage of evolution that created organisms of some kind that could easily spread.

Some more devout Christians might not like that interpretation though, since I think the story could be made at least a little more literal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There isn’t enough water to flood the planet

I think that a being powerful enough to create the entire universe can handle a little water

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah, but that falls in the “because magic” category. That water would have to come from somewhere, or the crust of the whole world would have to flatten out so that the existing water would form a thin layer on top.

Either way, it would be “magic.”

permalink
report
parent
reply

Microblog Memes

!microblogmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, Twitter X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.7K

    Posts

  • 72K

    Comments