• 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.

How should the problems with religious historical accounts be dealt with?

WTH happened to the OP? The ol' post and run?
 
Could such a miracle happen today?

Is it possible? Sure, the likelihood? Not very strong. Christ said that if we get a miracle we won't believe so we will just keep asking for miracles.

Now, does that mean miraculous things don't happen? No, is it as dramatic as things that happened in the Bible? Probably not. Not saying they don't or can't happen, just saying it isn't likely.
 
Is it possible? Sure, the likelihood? Not very strong. Christ said that if we get a miracle we won't believe so we will just keep asking for miracles.

Now, does that mean miraculous things don't happen? No, is it as dramatic as things that happened in the Bible? Probably not. Not saying they don't or can't happen, just saying it isn't likely.

Why do think some very devout Christians who handle snakes and receive a bite die?
 
Because they don't use their brain and handle snakes. That's why. Never understood snake handlers.

Mark 16:17-18 records, “And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will … pick up snakes with their hands.” As a result of this text, there are some churches that practice snake handling. During church services, people actually handle poisonous snakes, supposedly giving evidence that they are true believers who are empowered and protected by God.
 
Mark 16:17-18 records, “And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will … pick up snakes with their hands.” As a result of this text, there are some churches that practice snake handling. During church services, people actually handle poisonous snakes, supposedly giving evidence that they are true believers who are empowered and protected by God.

Yes, the problem is that they take that out of context. It was in no way a command to go try and flirt with a snake.
 
Yes, the problem is that they take that out of context. It was in no way a command to go try and flirt with a snake.

What context would that be? It seems pretty clear, having read the lines before and after.
 
What context would that be? It seems pretty clear, having read the lines before and after.

It's talking about provisions of protection, it is not a command. Nowhere does it say go pick up a snake.
 
It's talking about provisions of protection, it is not a command. Nowhere does it say go pick up a snake.

I could be wrong but I don't think the believers think they're commanded to do so. They just think they'll be protected if they do.
 
Well, then how is the Bible not calling true believers stupid?

Now you are twisting words. The Bible does not say go do something dangerous without cause and there won't be any consequences.
 
Now you are twisting words. The Bible does not say go do something dangerous without cause and there won't be any consequences.

Well, it may not say you should do it, but apparently believers do do it. Is the Bible just saying that some believers are stupid? Can some believer drink poison without harm?
 
Well, it may not say you should do it, but apparently believers do do it. Is the Bible just saying that some believers are stupid? Can some believer drink poison without harm?

If you notice in the book of Acts, Paul had a viper latch on to his hand, he ended up not being harmed. It is those kids of things the Bible is talking about. It is not talking about intentionally seeking out trouble. It also is not saying that Christians are invincible either.
 
If you notice in the book of Acts, Paul had a viper latch on to his hand, he ended up not being harmed. It is those kids of things the Bible is talking about. It is not talking about intentionally seeking out trouble. It also is not saying that Christians are invincible either.

It seems to me you're just putting your own spin on it.
 
It seems to me you're just putting your own spin on it.

No, that's not spin. The Bible never said that you should go pick up a snake and expect to not be harmed. Never said that, period. It said it will be a sign, and it was, with Paul.
 
No, that's not spin. The Bible never said that you should go pick up a snake and expect to not be harmed. Never said that, period. It said it will be a sign, and it was, with Paul.

One would assume that the writers of the Bible would have written Paul if they meant Paul.
 
Since there is a good now flame rule in effect perhaps we can get a decent discussion going on this.

many religions tell stories that are simply factually not true. There are reasons for this. perhaps it is parable, or perhaps it is ignorance. My personal belief is that, especially in the case of big religions, school should educate our children on the basic beliefs and history of religion as it has been a huge influence in society. Even an atheist who doesn't believe in god knows that the idea has had massive effects.

So right here we have a non-offensive open discussion. How do we include religion in education, which is important to understanding the world we live in, while also dealing with the ideas that conflict with reality and science? For example at what point do you put aside the adam and eve story and start looking at historical records.

Although I'm religious myself, I think it would be wise to keep in mind that the Bible, like many other religious scriptures, were written in a certain historical context and to know about the problems of tradition of these scriptures.

For example, while I do believe Noah, Abraham and Moses existed and were divine prophets, I still see that the scriptures we have at hand about them were first written down ca. 700 to even thousands of years, respectively, after they lived (the oldest books of the Bible date back to ca. 500 BC, but Moses, i.e., probably lived ca. 1300 BC). So before it was first written down, all these stories had been passed on orally, and we all know what that says about accuracy. The old Hebrew tribes back then didn't have the same concept of authorship and authenticity as we have today, there are even passages that were added or changed later, even when there existed a written book already (some prophet books, i.e., consist of different "layers" that were authored centuries apart).

So while I believe the core of these stories is probably true, it shouldn't be regarded as a history book or literal truth. The Bible is a mix of moral lectures, historiography, old myths (some which probably even predate the acknowledgment of a one and only single God), royal chronicles, scientific opinions from a time when there was no scientific method -- and none of that is clearly differentiated from the other.

Yet as a believer, I think these scriptures have a special status, as they were confirmed by later divine prophets and they're a yardstick all believers of certain religions agree on. But that doesn't mean that I'd confuse them with scientific or historical fact. The Bible is not meant to be a science or history book.
 
Yeah, you're assuming that they're talking only about Paul.

Did I actually say that? Hmmmmm..... No, I believe it happens with missionaries in the field today. I belive God does put a hedge of protection around people doing his work.
 
Back
Top Bottom