Da Vinci Code

[Blitzkreig]

I find it strange that those who most oppose the historical claims in the DaVince Code are the same people who find a book with things like talking snakes, transfiguration and resurrection perfectly reasonable and completely legitimate.

Just an observation.

That book isn't presented as fact by the author. Think man think.

[Jolly Roger]

I didn't say the DaVinci Code was true - I only pointed out that it's infinitely more believable than many Biblical stories in my opinion

[Falkomagno]

the book ist way too better than the movie...

[b.k. barunt]

Read it cover to cover, I own a copy of the King James and New International versions of the Bible. I've also read the Book of Mormon as well as a few of the apocryphal texts. It's all a control mechanism designed to bind both man and God to the word of the Church-with-a-capital C.

I've heard this opinion before, and it baffles me, but then i figure it's an uneducated opinion from people who've never read the Bible. You say you've read it and still believe this - like i said, baffling.

I studied the Bible intensely for 14 years after my conversion in 1971. The more i studied it, the more i saw that the organized church - especially the Roman Catholic - did not line up with it. I finally threw up my hands in disgust and walked away from the ministry (i was a lay minister - unpaid, for those of you unfamiliar with the term). God wouldn't let me walk away, so i ran, and ended up the bitter, profane old man that you know from Flame Wars.

So to hear you say that the Bible is used as a "control mechanism to bind both man and God to the Church" is mind boggling. Just a brief example:

I Timothy 4:1-3
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly,
that in the latter times some shall depart from
the faith, giving heed to seducing
spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Speaking lies in hypocrisy;
having their consciences seared
with a hot iron.
Forbidding to marry, and
commanding to abstain from
meats, which God hath created
to be received with thanksgiving
of them which believe and know the truth.

Here are two major doctrines of the Roman Catholic church, not merely castigated, but referred to as "doctrines of devils". I could fill 5 or 6 pages of this thread with a plethora of other examples, but i doubt anyone would read them - it is human nature that binds one to the Church, as a more palatable and less demanding substitute for the truth of the Bible. Also, if the Bible is a tool to give the Church more control, why was it an offense punishable by death to own a copy of the scriptures in the common tongue for over 1800 years in the Catholic church?

[Lord and Master]

It isn't the job of a Church, you, or I to make sure the stupid don't do stupid things.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't want to waste my time on the second work by the author of the loathsome Angels & Demons *poorly repressed shudder*

It kind of IS yours; ours; theirs; societies; job to make sure the stupid don't do stupid things. You never tell someone (whatever age/position/role) not to do that 'cos they'd otherwise end up in a painful/humiliating/dangerous situation?

I quite liked Angel & Demons, got well into making my own ambigrams from reading that! Digital Fortress is complete trash on the other hand... The other's one good.

...why was it an offense punishable by death to own a copy of the scriptures in the common tongue for over 1800 years in the Catholic church?

What? Was it? Because it should have been in Latin or what?

[PLAYER57832]

...why was it an offense punishable by death to own a copy of the scriptures in the common tongue for over 1800 years in the Catholic church?

What? Was it? Because it should have been in Latin or what?

And yet, the irony is that Latin was the tongue of the masses at the time. One reason it separated from the Greek Orthodox was that the desire to reach people in the language they spoke (Latin) as opposed to the more educated tongue (Greek).

Still, the Greek Bible remains as the earliest complete Bible. The Latin Bible was eventually translated many times, in persuit of missionarism.

[pimpdave]

i doubt anyone would read them

I read just about everything you write, actually. Especially when it's about religion or theology. I'm amazed by your knowledge and grateful for your willingness to share it.

Don't hesitate to post. You've got at least one fan right here.

And now that my head is so far up your ass, I might as well check your prostate. Any problems lately?

[b.k. barunt]

...why was it an offense punishable by death to own a copy of the scriptures in the common tongue for over 1800 years in the Catholic church?

What? Was it? Because it should have been in Latin or what?

Although, as Player mentioned, Latin was the common tongue when Jerome translated the Latin Vulgate, there were no printing presses back then and only the priests had copies of the Latin Bible. When Gutenberg invented the printing press the law pertaining to possessing a copy in the common tongue (no longer Latin by that time) was enacted. I would refer anyone wanting documentation to the "Syllabus of Errors", which is an old Catholic document citing a list of transgressions which would cause one to be accursed (anathema). The passage reads: "If any man is found to have a copy of the scriptures in the common tongue, he shall be anathema." This and other laws were enacted to give the Church absolute power over the populace. There is a long and bloody history of the Roman Catholic methods of maintaining that absolute power. When John Tyndale first translated the Bible into English, he was pursued relentlessly by the Catholics, who were so enraged that he died before they could get their hands on him, that they dug up his grave and scattered his bones over the countryside.

[Falkomagno]

I think that the point isn't if the bible is a mass control tool or not (certainly it is). I think that some people respect in an irrational level the bible because they think that it's the God's word and it's somekind of a holy text, written by god itself. And it's not.A bible is a book as any other, with more historical value than a philosophical one. If you study the bible along 14 o 15 year..obviously, you gonna develop some kind of worship to this book, but it doesn't means that the bible has the definitive and last word, or an outstanding level of knowledge, it's more that you have study a book too much and lose your objetivity

[PLAYER57832]

I think that the point isn't if the bible is a mass control tool or not (certainly it is). I think that some people respect in an irrational level the bible because they think that it's the God's word and it's somekind of a holy text, written by god itself. And it's not.A bible is a book as any other, with more historical value than a philosophical one. If you study the bible along 14 o 15 year..obviously, you gonna develop some kind of worship to this book, but it doesn't means that the bible has the definitive and last word, or an outstanding level of knowledge, it's more that you have study a book too much and lose your objetivity

It is a matter of faith and belief, not proof. You cannot prove Christianity is wrong... and we cannot prove you are wrong.

However, telling anyone that their holy scripture is "just another book" is bound to upset people. Saying that you don't believe it is simple opinion, but saying that "you all are wrong and obviously have not studied your book enough or you would know that" is simply rude.

[Falkomagno]

I think that the point isn't if the bible is a mass control tool or not (certainly it is). I think that some people respect in an irrational level the bible because they think that it's the God's word and it's somekind of a holy text, written by god itself. And it's not.A bible is a book as any other, with more historical value than a philosophical one. If you study the bible along 14 o 15 year..obviously, you gonna develop some kind of worship to this book, but it doesn't means that the bible has the definitive and last word, or an outstanding level of knowledge, it's more that you have study a book too much and lose your objetivity

It is a matter of faith and belief, not prove. You cannot prove Christianity is wrong... and we cannot prove you are wrong.

However, telling anyone that their holy scripture is "just another book" is bound to upset people. Saying that you don't believe it is simple opinion, but saying that "you all are wrong and obviously have not studied your book enough or you would know that" is simply rude.

You are totally right. I Apologies if my crude way to tell what i think hurts some sensibilities. Anyone can have their own beliefs and respect each others. I respect yours, even if I think way too different, and expect the same from you.

[PLAYER57832]

I think that the point isn't if the bible is a mass control tool or not (certainly it is). I think that some people respect in an irrational level the bible because they think that it's the God's word and it's somekind of a holy text, written by god itself. And it's not.A bible is a book as any other, with more historical value than a philosophical one. If you study the bible along 14 o 15 year..obviously, you gonna develop some kind of worship to this book, but it doesn't means that the bible has the definitive and last word, or an outstanding level of knowledge, it's more that you have study a book too much and lose your objetivity

It is a matter of faith and belief, not prove. You cannot prove Christianity is wrong... and we cannot prove you are wrong.

However, telling anyone that their holy scripture is "just another book" is bound to upset people. Saying that you don't believe it is simple opinion, but saying that "you all are wrong and obviously have not studied your book enough or you would know that" is simply rude.

You are totally right. I Apologies if my crude way to tell what i think hurts some sensibilities. Anyone can have their own beliefs and respect each others. I respect yours, even if I think way too different, and expect the same from you.

Actually, I misread what you were saying. I thought you said that anyone who studies it for 14-15 years will see its not true, not the reverse. Even so, I was not offended. I just wanted to clarify my position.

As I said... I don't try and convince anybody my faith is true, though I do like discussing all sorts of things.

[b.k. barunt]

I think that the point isn't if the bible is a mass control tool or not (certainly it is). I think that some people respect in an irrational level the bible because they think that it's the God's word and it's somekind of a holy text, written by god itself. And it's not.A bible is a book as any other, with more historical value than a philosophical one. If you study the bible along 14 o 15 year..obviously, you gonna develop some kind of worship to this book, but it doesn't means that the bible has the definitive and last word, or an outstanding level of knowledge, it's more that you have study a book too much and lose your objetivity

The obvious question that you overlook is why would i study it for 14 years? I was not in school for it, i made no money from my studies, and all i stood to gain was the truth.

To say that the Bible is not God's Word is a matter of personal opinion. To say that it's "a book like any other" shows ignorance. There is no book that was ever written that is "like" the Bible. I invite you to prove me wrong however, if you can find some facts like the ones i'll share with you, and not just your own uneducated opinion. La pura verdad en lugar de su conceptos.

The Bible was written by at least 15 different authors from semi-literate shepherds and fishermen to kings and scholars, and yet there are no contradictions - believe me i've debated this point many times, with some seminarians and a couple of Jesuits. If you disagree, give me a contradiction.

I challenge you to name one book on religion written by more than 1 author, where there are no disagreements between the authors. I've read the Book of Mormon, Doctrines and Covenants, and studied the Koran - these are cheap rip-offs of the Bible, and have glaring errors in them. But let's keep it simple - name a religious text that is the basis for a religion that has a plurality of authors who do not disagree with each other.

If you can't, maybe you need to rethink your stance on the Bible being just another book.

[Falkomagno]

The obvious question that you overlook is why would i study it for 14 years? I was not in school for it, i made no money from my studies, and all i stood to gain was the truth.

To say that the Bible is not God's Word is a matter of personal opinion. To say that it's "a book like any other" shows ignorance. There is no book that was ever written that is "like" the Bible. I invite you to prove me wrong however, if you can find some facts like the ones i'll share with you, and not just your own uneducated opinion. La pura verdad en lugar de su conceptos.

The Bible was written by at least 15 different authors from semi-literate shepherds and fishermen to kings and scholars, and yet there are no contradictions - believe me i've debated this point many times, with some seminarians and a couple of Jesuits. If you disagree, give me a contradiction.

I challenge you to name one book on religion written by more than 1 author, where there are no disagreements between the authors. I've read the Book of Mormon, Doctrines and Covenants, and studied the Koran - these are cheap rip-offs of the Bible, and have glaring errors in them. But let's keep it simple - name a religious text that is the basis for a religion that has a plurality of authors who do not disagree with each other.

If you can't, maybe you need to rethink your stance on the Bible being just another book.

Well, let's start.

First of all, and as I said earlier, it's a wrong thing to disrespect people point of view, specially about the religious perceptions. When you call someone other positions as "uneducated", or call the person as "ignorant" you just showing ignorance, bigotry and puts your position as a stubborn and close view, no matter if it's sustained or not.

let's do a civilized debate

The key point that you show to demostrate your point it's that the bible is not a book as any other, because was written by different kind of authors, and doesn't presents contradictions. I think that this is a weak argument. Take any scientific study, and you probably will find that was development for many authors, all willing to demostrate some thesis, and you gonna get that, many authors and no contradictions.


examples:
(*)Transnational College of Lex (1996). What is Quantum Mechanics? A Physics Adventure. Language Research Foundation, Boston. ISBN 0-9643504-1-6. OCLC 34661512.

(*)# ^ Conceptualizing human variation (2004) by S O Y Keita, R A Kittles1, C D M Royal, G E Bonney, P Furbert-Harris, G M Dunston & C N Rotimi in Nature Genetics 36, S17 - S20 PubMed

(*)^compilation various authors, Sam Wineburg (eds.), ed (2000). "Introduction". Knowing Teaching and Learning History, National and International Perspectives. New York & London: New York University Press. p. 6. ISBN 0-8147-8141-1.


tell me if you find any contradictions in those books.

The extreme example it's that me and 14 friends write a book, and all in the same thesis, and be sure that we would be extremely careful to be very consistent to avoid any contradiction, and that's all. That imaginary book is in the same level that the bible according with your main thesis. That's because it's a weak argument.

Now, you challenged me to find contradictions in the bible. I'm sure ther it's contradictions, my common sens bring me that simple example suddenly. this is two common use sentences from the bible:
"an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" Exodus 21:23–27
But also have this:
"turn the other cheek" Matthew 5, 38-42
You can say that's it's not contradictory. I think that we've talking about two way too different perspectives. and it's logical, and with this i'm responding you about your last part of your post.
It's logical that the bible has different perspectives, because it's composed by two differents books. The old and the new testament. You should know that the old testament, with that angry and revengeful god, with the Lex talionis, and a complete and concise style, it's the holy book of the Judaism, the Torah. Later, when Jesus came out, there it's the new testametn, with another and different prespective, with a kind and comprehensive god. You should know that Jesus and all their supporters were jewish, and with the travels of peter around rome, Christianity was founded. so, we're talking about two religions wich share a part of their holy book, how can be non-contradictory the old and the new testament?.

i whant clarify something. I said that the bible it's a book as any other, but, all we know that isn't. Was the first text printed, probably the book with most copies in the hole world, and can be considerated as the most widespread and influential book of history, wich obviously avoid to talk about the bible as a "book as any other". but, to me, it keeps to be a book, with more historical value than a life guidance (or The truth itself as you state that it is), since we can infer what the people of the time though when it was written. It's a book that proposed something, but if you take it away that "holy" and "written by god" halo, you can just see a book that can be debated, and can be wrong.Can be useful, but you can just take whatever you find worth and the rest just ignore, without the attachements of "sin" implies in all the critisism to a holy and religious matter

The knowledge it's a constant pursuit, the truth it's reached by the amount of all possible information, and essentially, by THE REASON. If your faith brings to you the truth, I respect that, but I can not share it, because I need a logical and reasonable substratum for such so important issue, as the conception of divinity, and the religous view certainly is

[b.k. barunt]

Quite a long post for skirting the issue - what's the Spanish word for filibuster?

To say that i want facts instead of uneducated opinion is not an attack on your intelligence. It is obvious from your posts that you are not educated insofar as the Bible is concerned. Now you are obviously educated and intelligent, but as far as the Bible goes, any opinion that you offer will be uneducated. Uneducated is not synonymous with stupid. If i offer you an opinion on the Bible, it will be an educated opinion. If i offer you an opinion on physics, it will be an uneducated opinion. You can speak my language much better than i can speak yours - does that mean you are smarter? No, but you are probably more educated.

I asked you to name one book on RELIGION that was written by 2 or more authors, and you proceed to name a bunch of books that have nothing whatsoever to do with religion. Now that would be construed by many as stupid, but i'll attribute it to your being too interested in what you had to say to really pay much attention to what i asked. My question remains the same, should you desire to answer it.

Your "contradiction" example was abysmal. You even discredit it yourself when you acknowledge that you are comparing a piece of the Old Covenant with the New Covenant. So that was by your own admission a halfhearted attempt at a contradiction. It seems that after that long post, my questions remain the same and are as yet to be answered.

[Snorri1234]

This is truly a strange thread.


How can one be for or against a movie? How does that work?

[b.k. barunt]

We kinda forgot about the movie a few pages ago.

[Falkomagno]

Quite a long post for skirting the issue - what's the Spanish word for filibuster?

Literally its Filibustero, but by meaning its closer with Embaucador, obstructor, dilatante

Your "contradiction" example was abysmal. You even discredit it yourself when you acknowledge that you are comparing a piece of the Old Covenant with the New Covenant. So that was by your own admission a halfhearted attempt at a contradiction.

No. It's a contradiction because when you talking about the bible, it's the bible as a hole. Or what the heck you mean when challenge people to find contradictions in the bible?? the same chapters??..pff. You tell me where would be the range that you can consider acceptable...BS

Anyway, I'm sure that you'll never been satified with any answer for me, and in a extreme lack of arguments you can always could use the God works in misterious way or another dark faith-based trick.

You (as so many others believers) just gonna fell cofortable and safe with an answer as "Oh yeah, I was so sacrilegious but now I realized that the truth is in the bible and any other text are a cheap rip-offs of it written by heatens, and yes, i'm so ignorant about the bible but you can guide me because you are so educated about it...."

no. that's not going to happen. sorry if I disappoint you.

Have a nice day amigo

[dewey316]

Now, you challenged me to find contradictions in the bible. I'm sure ther it's contradictions, my common sens bring me that simple example suddenly. this is two common use sentences from the bible:
"an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" Exodus 21:23–27
But also have this:
"turn the other cheek" Matthew 5, 38-42
You can say that's it's not contradictory. I think that we've talking about two way too different perspectives. and it's logical, and with this i'm responding you about your last part of your post.

Using that is a very poor example. If you took the time to look up those verses, please take the time to read the rest of the chapters. Exodus 21, is explaining the law to the Israelites, it explains the justification for certain punishments. The eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth is meant to mean that the punish fits the crime. The examples used in the rest of the chapter straight forward.

In Matthew 5, Jesus is taking it beyond a society level, and talking on the personal level. He is saying, that while the law say an eye for an eye, on the personal level, if you seek revenge, you have seperated yourself from God. This is in direct response to the state of the Jewish faith at the time of Jesus, verses such as the one in Exodus were being used and taught in a different context, and Jesus is reminding his Jewish audience during that sermon, of what the difference between the law, and the personal response is. At the time there was also a rift between the Jewish leadership and Rome on who should punish people for certain offenses, the teachings of the Jewish leaders reflected this, and they used verses such as the one in Exodus to justify their own actions.

You are certainly more than welcome to feel that they contradict each other, but I would also hope that you would spend the time studying the context and history behind each of these. I believe that if you study them a little more, you may start to see how those two statements can fit together. If you do study it, and feel they still cause a problem for you, then that is what your studies have found, while I may not agree, I can respect an opinion that is based in actual study of the text.

[Falkomagno]

When you study a text willing to find the divine truth in it, It's hard for you to recognice possible mistakes.

Objectively, the Bible has many mistakes, incoherencies and contradictions. I'm gonna put you some of these. But, as I said before, I respect your faith, and, since you are not hurting anybody and you be a good citizen, believe in whatever you want.

War or Peace?

EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.

Is Jesus equal to or lesser than?

JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one.

JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.


Is it folly to be wise or not?

PRO 4:7 Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.

ECC 1:18 For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

1CO 1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."


The shape of the earth

ISA 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

MAT 4:8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

Astronomical bodies are spherical, and you cannot see the entire exterior surface from anyplace. The kingdoms of Egypt, China, Greece, Crete, sections of Asia Minor, India, Maya (in Mexico), Carthage (North Africa), Rome (Italy), Korea, and other settlements from these kingdoms of the world were widely distributed. But well., There it's people that stills think that the earth it's flat.


And so on and on

no mention the age of some charachters, between 950 years and some. hehe, you people gonna said that in ancient times people live more???


The Bible it's a historical book, and show us what the ancient jewish and the proto-christians saw the world,a nd the relations between that "choosen people" and the rest of the world, knowing by them. (Why not a single world about America for example? maybe God doesn't know that America exist neither)