• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Reforming the Word of God

CLAX1911 said:
No I'm not. It's intellectually lazy as well as spiritually lazy.

The argument is simple. They want to think the bible is the word of god because it takes more work than reading a book, to truly understand.

Forget the fact that it's preposterous in some places.

The argument is for laziness.
Click to expand...

That is, what I said. Your 'arguments' haven't any basis
 
CrabCake said:
No, that's not what I am saying.

Like I said...it depends on what you mean by infallible.
Click to expand...
I mean without flaw.

If all you meant by infallible is that they believe it to be the word of God, then you are right.
Click to expand...
If God's word is fallible why is he god?

But if you were implying some kind of biblical literalism then you are almost certainly wrong.
Click to expand...
I don't really know what you mean by "biblical literalism" but that isn't what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the belief that it is the word of God.
 
CrabCake said:
You are mistaken.

Getting back to the original topic...what does this have to do with the idea of following the bible?
Click to expand...

No I am not

It goes to changing the word of god, if the word has changed, who changed it, did god make a mistake then corrected it, or did the writers make the mistake and when
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
No I am not
Click to expand...

Yes, you are

Lord Tammerlain said:
It goes to changing the word of god, if the word has changed, who changed it, did god make a mistake then corrected it, or did the writers make the mistake and when
Click to expand...

How does it go back to changing the word of God? You haven't mentioned the word of God having ever been changed in any of this. You only spoke of the evolution of beliefs and syncretism with the surrounding cultures. Were you also interested in proposing that there were earlier versions of the Torah?
 
Last edited:
CrabCake said:
Yes, you are
Click to expand...
Prove it
How does it go back to changing the word of God? You haven't mentioned the word of God having ever been changed in any of this. You only spoke of the evolution of beliefs and syncretism with the surrounding cultures. Were you also interested in proposing that there were earlier versions of the Torah?
Click to expand...
The evolution of beliefs of course would be reflected in changing the word of god. There are several versions of the bible, some slight some larger
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Judaism originated around 500 BCE, which was influenced by Zoroastianism which dates another 500 years older.
Click to expand...

There was some pieces that were compiled around there, but there are fragments of various scriptures that are as old as 800 bce. A piece of jewelry that is dated at 700 bce has one of the major Jewish prayers inscribed on it.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Prove it
Click to expand...

You are the one who is making a claim. I am merely telling you that your unsupported claim is mistaken. It's up to you to prove your claim. It isn't up to me to disprove an unsupported claim.

If you want people to believe your claim, go ahead and prove it.
Lord Tammerlain said:
The evolution of beliefs of course would be reflected in changing the word of god.
Click to expand...

OK. Show where it has been changed.

Lord Tammerlain said:
There are several versions of the bible, some slight some larger
Click to expand...

It depends on what you mean by "version". There are multiple editions of The Brothers Karamazov in English. Various people have translated it to English and enthusiasts often prefer one version over the others. Ultimately, they all tell the same story. It's the same thing with the scriptures.
 
Last edited:
RAMOSS said:
There was some pieces that were compiled around there, but there are fragments of various scriptures that are as old as 800 bce. A piece of jewelry that is dated at 700 bce has one of the major Jewish prayers inscribed on it.
Click to expand...

It may not have been a Jewish prayer at the time it was inscribed.

The story of Noah and his ark predates Judiasm by about a thousand years. It's an evolution of the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
It may not have been a Jewish prayer at the time it was inscribed.

The story of Noah and his ark predates Judaism by about a thousand years. It's an evolution of the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh.
Click to expand...

WHen it comes to ti being a Jewish prayer, the prayer was inscribed in proto-Hebrew, and shard fragments from that time show at least some of the Torah was in place in use at the time Judaism was supposed to have existed. Yes, the story of Noah has strong similarities to the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh, not only that, but parts of the story of Exodus was ripped off from the legend of Sargon when it comes to Moses' birth. However, it appears that the Hebrew faith existed as a separate entity by the 7th century bce, although tradition has it as early as the 10th century. I am quite sure that it changed over the centuries, all religions do. When you look at the evidence in relation to the surrounds, and then include the oral tradition, it is strong evidence that it was at least 'proto-judaism', and a religion separate from other Canaanite religions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom