Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 1 of 12 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 113

Thread: Who wrote the Bible, and When?

  1. -1
    Dolphan7's Avatar
    Desert Dolphin

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    16,492
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Tucson, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Who wrote the Bible, and When?

    Quote Originally Posted by HaRdKoReXXX View Post
    LOL

    Little info for you guys on the subject. At the time of Jesus' death there were 13 other religious sects claiming to have a deity or prophet at the head of their group.

    The only difference between Jesus/Christianity and those sects is that no one in those groups claimed their prophet had been resurrected.

    Remember, the Bible never speaks much of the resurrection itself. Only that Jesus meets a man on the road and tells him to spread the word of his return.

    Now I wasnt there (and neither were ANYONE) so obviously this is speculation to an extent. Some have said Jesus was the son of a Roman soldier, this is probably the likeliest scenario.
    Under your premise - that no one was there-, why is your scenario the most likely? What is it based on? Woudn't all scenarios be equally likely or equally unlikely?

    To me it is more likely that since the New Testament was written by either an Apostle of Jesus, a companion of one of the Apostles, or a close relative of Jesus, that what they wrote about their personal witness of events bears more credibility than anything else.

    Players come and go, but I will always be a Miami Dolphins Fan first and foremost.




    Quote Quote  

  2. -2
    HaRdKoReXXX's Avatar
    Trigger Man

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    876
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Coral Springs, Fl
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphan7 View Post
    Under your premise - that no one was there-, why is your scenario the most likely? What is it based on? Woudn't all scenarios be equally likely or equally unlikely?

    To me it is more likely that since the New Testament was written by either an Apostle of Jesus, a companion of one of the Apostles, or a close relative of Jesus, that what they wrote about their personal witness of events bears more credibility than anything else.
    No one living today was there. The new testament was not written by any of those people you mentioned. It was a story that was told by those people and then retold over years and years until somone wrote it down.

    Furthermore, the Bible itself was copied (by monks) from text that was not in the greatest of condition. They copied it the best they could, adding their own flavor and converting the translation to the best of their abilities.

    So you see the Bible itself had evolved (no pun intended there) into an ever-growing manuscript each time it was copied.

    So logically one would have to assume that since the Bible is not the word of God, but the word of God as told by man, then retold by man numerous times, Im basing his death/resurrection on the most likeliest of scenarios pertinent to the time of his life/death.

    In this case, I give the opinion of the 'Roman Soldier" theory due to their presence in Jerusalem at the time. But this is just an opinion I claim none of it to be fact.

    THanks To TractorTraylor for the Sig!
    Quote Quote  

  3. -3
    Dolphan7's Avatar
    Desert Dolphin

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    16,492
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Tucson, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by HaRdKoReXXX View Post
    No one living today was there. The new testament was not written by any of those people you mentioned. It was a story that was told by those people and then retold over years and years until somone wrote it down.
    On what basis do you claim the known authors of the NT, are not actually the known authors?

    Furthermore, the Bible itself was copied (by monks) from text that was not in the greatest of condition. They copied it the best they could, adding their own flavor and converting the translation to the best of their abilities.
    Really? Are you aware of the OT tradition of copying manuscripts?


    Old Testament Quality Control


    1. A Synagogue roll must be written on the skins of clean animals.

    2. They must be prepared for the particular use of the synagogue by a Jew.

    3. These must be fastened together with strings from clean animals.

    4. Every skin must contain a certain number of columns, equal throughout the entire codex.

    5. The length of each column must not extend less than 48 or more than 60 lines, and the breadth must consist of 30 letters.

    6. The whole copy must be first lined; and if three words were written without a line, it is worthless.

    7. The ink should be black, neither red, green, nor any other color, and be prepared according to a definite recipe.

    8. An authentic copy must be the exemplar, from which the transcriber ought not in the least to deviate.

    9. No word or letter, not even a yod, must be written from memory, the scribe not having looked at the codex before him.

    10. Between every consonant the space of a hair or thread must intervene.

    11. Between every new parashah, or section, the breadth of nine consonants.

    12. Between every book, three lines.

    13. The fifth book of Moses must terminate exactly with a line; but the rest need not do so.

    14. Besides this, the copyist must sit in full Jewish dress.

    15. Wash his whole body.

    16. Not begin to write the name of God with a pen newly dipped in ink.

    17. And should a king address him while writing that name, he must take no notice of him.

    Manuscripts not copied following these rules were immediately burned. This method of copying was so stringent, manuscripts were given equal authority with the original immediately.

    So you see the Bible itself had evolved (no pun intended there) into an ever-growing manuscript each time it was copied.
    Not really. When we compared transcripts to the Dead Sea Scrolls, we found that the copying over thousands of years was 95-98% textually pure. The 3-5% error were spelling, punctuation and didn't alter the meaning of the text.


    So logically one would have to assume that since the Bible is not the word of God, but the word of God as told by man, then retold by man numerous times, Im basing his death/resurrection on the most likeliest of scenarios pertinent to the time of his life/death.
    Logically speaking - if God exists, then He wouldn't allow men to corrupt His word, but would inspire men through the Holy Spirit to record accurately his Word. I mean what kind of a God would allow His word to be morphed into something he didn't mean it to say? Makes no sense logically.


    In this case, I give the opinion of the 'Roman Soldier" theory due to their presence in Jerusalem at the time. But this is just an opinion I claim none of it to be fact.
    If this, and the above.... is your opinion, then that is one thing, and you are certainly entitled to it.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -4
    Joker2thief's Avatar
    Until the Ragnarök

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Oct 2006
    Posts:
    366
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Along the Watchtower
    Thanks / No Thanks
    modern technology has proved the Bible wrong. That means that if there is a God, he didn't write the Bible and the Bible is not his word. If the Bible were the word of God and the Bible is wrong, then God is wrong. And if God can't be wrong, then the Bible, which is wrong, can't be the word of God.

    Men who lived thousands of years ago wrote the Bible. The authors had limited knowledge of the nature of the universe and wrote the Bible based on what they believed at the time. They didn't know the Earth was round and that it orbited the Sun, which is a star among billions of stars in the galaxy which is but one galaxy in billions of galaxies that have existed for billions of years. To them, the world was flat. There was up and there was down and God lived in the sky. They didn't know the world was round and there was no such thing as "up". They didn't know that the sky was a thin layer of gas that surrounds the surface of this planet. We have been to the sky and we have been above the sky and God isn't living there.
    Quote Quote  

  5. -5
    Dolphan7's Avatar
    Desert Dolphin

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    16,492
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Tucson, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Joker2thief View Post
    modern technology has proved the Bible wrong. That means that if there is a God, he didn't write the Bible and the Bible is not his word. If the Bible were the word of God and the Bible is wrong, then God is wrong. And if God can't be wrong, then the Bible, which is wrong, can't be the word of God.

    Men who lived thousands of years ago wrote the Bible. The authors had limited knowledge of the nature of the universe and wrote the Bible based on what they believed at the time. They didn't know the Earth was round and that it orbited the Sun, which is a star among billions of stars in the galaxy which is but one galaxy in billions of galaxies that have existed for billions of years. To them, the world was flat. There was up and there was down and God lived in the sky. They didn't know the world was round and there was no such thing as "up". They didn't know that the sky was a thin layer of gas that surrounds the surface of this planet. We have been to the sky and we have been above the sky and God isn't living there.
    This is getting off topic to the original thread, but if you would like to create another thread stating exactly how science has proven the bible wrong, I would be very interested in reading about it. Please don't respond in this thread though. Thanks!
    Quote Quote  

  6. -6
    emeraldfin's Avatar
    Gary Speed RIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2007
    Posts:
    4,776
    vCash:
    0
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Some of the writings in the Bible are written 200 YEARS after Jesus Christ died.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -7
    HaRdKoReXXX's Avatar
    Trigger Man

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Feb 2006
    Posts:
    876
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Coral Springs, Fl
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphan7 View Post
    Logically speaking - if God exists, then He wouldn't allow men to corrupt His word, but would inspire men through the Holy Spirit to record accurately his Word. I mean what kind of a God would allow His word to be morphed into something he didn't mean it to say? Makes no sense logically.
    This is why I claim none of what I say to be fact and state it merely as opinion. Because there is no logical way for either to prove the other wrong, it'd be pretty redundant to try.

    To the topic at hand, what kind of God allows his message to be morphed into something that kills, murders, commits genocide? Maybe not your God. But a God nonetheless.

    Ive always been under the impression that it's a mans actions, not his beliefs that matter. So what if Jesus wasn't the son of God? Did he not live an important life? If it turns out he was the son of a Roman soldier does it make his actions any less important?

    BTW, the reason I even brought up the 'Roman Soldier' theory because it was suggested several years ago by a very well respected historian who claimed evidence was found. Although I don't believe there was a enough found to substantiate his claim.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -8
    Dolphan7's Avatar
    Desert Dolphin

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    16,492
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Tucson, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Who wrote the Bible, and When?

    I have heard many different versions of the question about who wrote the Bible and when was it written. This thread if for those to express their views and why they hold those views.

    The predominate view held by most Biblical and secular Scholars is that the NT was completed in the first century, the last being completed around 95 AD. It was written by one of the 12 Apostles of Jesus - as in Matthew and John and Paul, or a companion of those Apostles - as in Luke and Mark, or a relative of Jesus as in James, Jude. Most of the NT was written between 50 and 65 AD.

    The OT was completed by around 400 BC, but was written over thousands of years of Jewish history. The OT was written by Prophets of God as in Moses who wrote the first 5 books, called the Torah/Pentateuch, sometime around 1400-1450 BC. Then there are the 12 Historical Books like Joshua, Judges, Samual, Kings, Chronicles. There are 5 Poetic Books like Psalms, Proverbs, Song Of Solomon. Last there are 17 prophetic books like Daniel, Isaiah, Ezekial Joel, Hosea. These are split into Major and Minor prophets. The OT was written between 1450 and 400 BC.
    Quote Quote  

  9. -9
    Mike13's Avatar
    You could have had free beer, for shame

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    19,330
    vCash:
    6826
    Loc:
    Miami, FL
    Thanks / No Thanks
    The OT was written by Prophets of God as in Moses who wrote the first 5 books,
    Werent the creation stories written long after Moses had died?
    So why would the Book of Genesis be credited to him?
    Thats something thats been bugging me.
    Once Dmac is drafted a Dmac Jersey will spontaneously materialize in the closet of each and every Dolfan...

    ...and not that replica crap either...
    Quote Quote  

  10. -10
    Dolphan7's Avatar
    Desert Dolphin

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    May 2004
    Posts:
    16,492
    vCash:
    1000
    Loc:
    Tucson, Arizona
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike13 View Post
    Werent the creation stories written long after Moses had died?
    So why would the Book of Genesis be credited to him?
    Thats something thats been bugging me.
    It has been widely accepted that Moses wrote the first 5 books of the OT.

    What I would ask is where do you get the idea that creation stories were written after he died? I would start there and find out where that is coming from first.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. I wrote an email to Peter Moore and he wrote back!
    By mor911 in forum Gaming Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-20-2008, 03:33 PM
  2. Peter King wrote what???
    By DolfanTom in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 02-07-2006, 10:26 AM
  3. Whoever wrote this is an idiot...
    By ItalianDolFan in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-19-2005, 09:16 PM
  4. Drew wrote a book
    By WeVie in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-17-2003, 08:20 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •