Has anyone actually read the bible in it's entirety? - Page 3

LilOne1989 · 09-11-2006, 05:42 PM

My aunt had a next door neighbor that thought very poorly of our family (we were Rebels) and she obviously didn't know I was one of them and one day she told me, beside to stay away from "those bad people" that she had read the Bible multiple times and was going on her next time and that everytime she read it the book and it's meaning were different for her. I totally understand that I think that you can read the Bible from cover to cover this year and get a different meaning next year when you read it again. Your current situation in life determines how you translate things not the words themselves. The words themselves are meaningless, it is the message they carry that matters.

Grant · 09-13-2006, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by palefrost

Yes but not from front to back. If you do that it really makes no sense at all.

The bible is collection of short stories. There are tons and tons of other religious documents about Jesus and such that were not included in the bible that you read today. Throughout history it’s been edited time and again. By the time you get to the King James Version, it’s probably gone through tons of editing already. Not by unbiased people either, but mostly by the church itself.

So here we have a church that gets paid by its followers. They're mostly the only literate people around so they can pretty much rewrite or leave out small portions of text that don't properly suit their own personal beliefs.

Translations change the meaning of things as well. Heck even changing the punctuation in each sentence can dramatically change the meaning, as we hear time and again if you ever watch televangelists do their thing. In Greece, there are many words to express the different kinds of love for example, yet translate that to English and there is only one.. Love. So instantly you lose meaning in the translations.

So, in the end what you have is a bunch of short stories which are probably translated to better suit the translator's belief of what it should say. Then these stories are edited by a bunch of other people with a vested interest in making the reader believe the stories are true whether they are or not, who get to select exactly which stories they deem to be true (and included) and those they deem not to be true (and don't add)? Plus, if you say that many of the "authors" were illiterate, which is fact, then obviously someone else wrote their passages for them.. Another translation along the way between the "author's" speech and what the writer actually wrote down.

what youve stated here about changes in the bible is simply not factual. show me one change... elsewhere though. i dont want to get this off-topic

nanners86 · 09-14-2006, 03:16 PM

I have not read the Bible in its entirity but I have read a very large portion of it.

penguinmama · 09-18-2006, 04:31 PM

Yes. I have read the Bible (KJV) through at least 3 times from front to back, in my lifetime. And much of it (especially Psalms, Proverbs, and the New Testament) many more times than that.

Faydwyn · 10-15-2006, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lpstong

My question at mind at this moment is why does it bother science so much about the Bible and its history. When nothing has been really proven about the beginning of time.

It’s less science bothering with the Bible and Christianity; and more the other way around. A great example of this is the ID vs. Evolution “debate” about whether they should be taught in science classes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lpstong

Look at carbon dating and how many times science had to revamp the whole process. I think its been atleast 2 or 3 times already. And science is suppose to be factual.

How factual is the Bible. Countries fight over the land that has been dated during the times of parts of the bible. Genetics of the Jews and the scattering of them. They believe they have found a tribe in South Africa which is to be one of the tribes of Isreal. They matched the DNA of the tribe, I believe about the total of 80 to Jews who are direct descendants of one of the tribes in Isreal. They believe there is a strong connection. Science also went out to try and prove if it was possible for Moses to split the red sea. Or where is the Noah's Ark. Still science can not disprove things in the bible as much as the bible can not disprove things of science that are base upon theory.

You are mischaracterizing science. Science never claims to have all the answers. Science explains things to the best of our ability based on available resources and information. As new and better information (data) comes to light, science changes and incorporates this new information. To put it simply, as we better understand things, science changes. For example, how much does a 5 year old know about computer programming? Now say that this same child grows up to become a computer programmer that has been trained, gone to college, etc. This person’s ideas about computer programming have changed over time because the child didn’t have the same resources (maturity, developed intellect) or the same information (training, college) as the adult.

Compare this to, say, Fundamentalist Christianity that claims to have all the answers and rigidly holds to the same ideas no matter what new evidence is presented.

I also find it interesting that you "bad-mouthed" science and then in the very next paragraph you use it to try to prove your own point.

Additionally, science has disproved many of the claims (if one considers them literal) made in the Bible.

Faydwyn · 10-15-2006, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LilOne1989

My aunt had a next door neighbor that thought very poorly of our family (we were Rebels) and she obviously didn't know I was one of them and one day she told me, beside to stay away from "those bad people" that she had read the Bible multiple times and was going on her next time and that everytime she read it the book and it's meaning were different for her. I totally understand that I think that you can read the Bible from cover to cover this year and get a different meaning next year when you read it again. Your current situation in life determines how you translate things not the words themselves.

I’ve found this to be true about other books. There are books that I’ve reread years later and which took on new meaning or deeper meaning for me.

riskey58 · 12-21-2006, 05:51 PM

I have never read the Bible all the way through. I would probably have to read two or three times to really understand all of it.

MickinEngland · 12-21-2006, 06:19 PM

I've never read the whole Bible because Jesus never said we had to ;)
The Old T is interesting but even so, people soon realised -
"Through Jesus we are saved,and not through Moses" (Acts 13:39)
"The covenant of Jesus is superior to the old one" (Heb 8:6-13)
"Jesus is worthy of more honour than Moses" (Heb 3:3)
"We serve in the new way of the spirit,not in the old way of the written code" (Rom 7:6)
"Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith" (Heb 12:2)
"The veil covers the old covenant,but is removed by Jesus" (2 Cor 3:12)
"Jesus gives us all we need for life" (2 Pet 1:3)
------------------------------------------------------

PhoenixReborn13 · 12-21-2006, 06:45 PM

Read the whole thing, both KJV and NIV translations, along with numerous apocrypha (Gospel of Thomas, Acts of Pilate, etc...)

berlinlife06 · 12-22-2006, 07:55 AM

When I was studying Theology and before that, I read most of the Bible. The whole New Testament and a great part of the Old Testament. And while analyzing the Bible, only concentrated on some chapters of the Genesis and Exodus, but it was a very profound study of those passages. I think it is a very entertaining book! It has everything, from science fiction, to love stories, sex, betrayal... no wonder it is still one of the best sellers... But I see it as a stories book, nothing else anymore.