The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum (Archive Board)
December 05, 2020, 12:21:24 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This is our Read Only Archive Board (closed to posting July 2011). Join our new vBulletin board!
 
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 05, 2020, 12:21:24 pm

Login with username, password and session length
Donate!
The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.
TC Staff
Important Information about this Archive Board
This message board is The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum's SMF Archive Board. It is closed to new memberships and to posting, but there are over 250,000 messages here that you can still search and read -- many full of interesting and useful information. (This board was open from February 2007 through June 2011).

Our new vBulletin discussion board is located at http://www.ecauldron.com/forum/ -- if you would like to participate in discussions like those you see here, please visit our new vBulletin message board, register an account and join in our discussions. We hope you will find the information in this message archive useful and will consider joining us on our new board.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
Author Topic: Question About Fake-ness Of Bible  (Read 8093 times)
Anda
Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 24, 2008, 03:11:08 pm
United States United States

Religion: Eclectic Wicca
Posts: 23


Blog entries (0)

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #15: May 21, 2008, 10:06:05 am »

Well he tells me all kinds of things about how the bible is contradictory and misprinted.

This is already something of a heated topic, with contributors from both sides. Smiley The fact is that there are a lot of people who agree, and a lot of people who disagree, with the idea that the Bible has been altered over time. It does have contradictions, mostly because many sections were written by different people, sometimes giving accounts of the same events, that none of the writers witnessed. Also, they aren't displayed in the order in which they were written, which confuses some. If that weren't enough, there are many documents from the same period or following periods, giving different versions of the same events, that aren't accepted by the Church and therefore don't appear in the Bible. When taking all of these documents into account, it gets even stickier.

I think I understand where you're coming from in your interest. I, too, am interested in hearing the theories about these documents, although I'm concerned by them from an intellectual standpoint only. It can be fascinating to hear what different people think about different things.

Many believe that the creation theory presented by the Bible, along with the flood account, are taken from more ancient scripts and were changed to fit the idea of a single God. This could be... Moses wrote both stories (indeed, five books of the Bible are accredited to him) after having access to Sumerian and other texts kept in the Egyptian royal library. Those eerie coincidences between the stories are likely not coincidental at all. Does that mean that the Bible is a lie and worthless as a spiritual tool? Not at all. It's a set of theories and stories meant to instruct, not unlike fables, and has the power to create much peace and happiness when used properly.

If you're curious, you might do some research online. Search for information on the Gnostic scrolls, the Gospel of Mary Magdeline, and alternate Bible translations. You might also look for parallels between the Bible and more ancient religious texts. There are a lot of viewpoints to be considered. Smiley

Anda
Logged

"Hope is a risk that we must run." ~ George Bernandos


Anda and her Projects

Welcome, Guest!
You will need to register and/or login to participate in our discussions.

Read our Rules and Policies and the Quoting Guidelines.

Help Fund Our Server? Donate to Lyricfox's Cancer Fund?

sefiru
Master Member
****
Last Login:April 11, 2016, 07:41:55 pm
Canada Canada

Religion: Kemetic
Posts: 661

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #16: May 21, 2008, 10:30:12 am »

Contradictory I can accept, but misprinted?  Perhaps some older versions of Bibles were occasionally miscopied or misprinted, but modern productions are pretty reliable.  Do you mean misinterpreted or mistranslated, rather than misprinted?

It happens quite a bit, and apparently different editions of the Bible get identified by their misprints:

The Wicked Bible (1631): "Thou shalt commit adultery" (bit of a Randallism there ...)
The Murderers' Bible (1801): "These are murderers, complainers" (should be "murmurers")
The Camel's Bible (1823): "Rebekah arose, and her camels" (damsels)
The Printer's Bible (1702): "Printers have persecuted me ..." (princes)
Logged
Sperran
Reserve Staff
Staff
High Adept Member
***
Last Login:October 18, 2014, 02:07:12 am
United States United States

Religion: Judaism
Posts: 2945


Adonai Echad

Blog entries (8)


« Reply #17: May 21, 2008, 10:35:22 am »

It happens quite a bit, and apparently different editions of the Bible get identified by their misprints:

The Wicked Bible (1631): "Thou shalt commit adultery" (bit of a Randallism there ...)
The Murderers' Bible (1801): "These are murderers, complainers" (should be "murmurers")
The Camel's Bible (1823): "Rebekah arose, and her camels" (damsels)
The Printer's Bible (1702): "Printers have persecuted me ..." (princes)

But you must admit that the misprints were much more a concern of distant past than the concerns of modern productions, i.e.--one might still have a legitimate argument regarding translation or interpretation but a modern copy of the Bible should be fairly free of typos.

Sperran
Logged
Sperran
Reserve Staff
Staff
High Adept Member
***
Last Login:October 18, 2014, 02:07:12 am
United States United States

Religion: Judaism
Posts: 2945


Adonai Echad

Blog entries (8)


« Reply #18: May 21, 2008, 10:42:04 am »

Many believe that the creation theory presented by the Bible, along with the flood account, are taken from more ancient scripts and were changed to fit the idea of a single God. This could be... Moses wrote both stories (indeed, five books of the Bible are accredited to him) after having access to Sumerian and other texts kept in the Egyptian royal library. Those eerie coincidences between the stories are likely not coincidental at all.

I agree it is possible that the stories were older stories modified to fit monotheism, but I can't agree with your theory behind it.  Virtually no modern Biblical scholars (with the exception of some hardcore Orthodox Jews and Fundamentalist Christians) attribute the authorship of the Torah to Moses.  Most scholars agree that the text was compiled like an anthology by at least three different editors...none of which was Moses.  We don't even have credible historical evidence that Moses existed or that the exodus ever occurred. 

Sperran
Logged
LyricFox
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:September 04, 2011, 02:39:11 pm
United States United States

Religion: Lapsed Hellenic Reconstructionist
Posts: 8959


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #19: May 21, 2008, 10:43:29 am »

The JPS translates the same verses as "wild ox".  That isn't to say that another translation doesn't talk about rhinos. 

Sperran
\

OK. I just remembered...IIRC, European peoples who saw the rhino the first time often mistakenly called it a unicorn. That would have been just a few hundred years ago, too. Sorry about that!
Logged

Visit The Breast Cancer Site & Click to fund free Mammograms
Hosts' Store: Doxy's Bazaar (w/Pagan Items)
Need Web Hosting? See The Cheap Web Hosting Report
LyricFox
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:September 04, 2011, 02:39:11 pm
United States United States

Religion: Lapsed Hellenic Reconstructionist
Posts: 8959


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #20: May 21, 2008, 10:46:15 am »

If you're curious, you might do some research online. Search for information on the Gnostic scrolls, the Gospel of Mary Magdeline, and alternate Bible translations. You might also look for parallels between the Bible and more ancient religious texts. There are a lot of viewpoints to be considered. Smiley

And if you're going to do that, be sure as hell you are on REPUTABLE websites, otherwise you end up with the drek.

This isn't a topic that you're going to get an answer on by reading the latest pop religion book or questionable website (and there are thousands).
Logged

Visit The Breast Cancer Site & Click to fund free Mammograms
Hosts' Store: Doxy's Bazaar (w/Pagan Items)
Need Web Hosting? See The Cheap Web Hosting Report
Melamphoros
Staff
Grand Adept Member
***
Last Login:March 28, 2015, 11:01:26 pm
United States United States

Religion: Informed Eclectic with Hellenic Overtones
TCN ID: Melamphoros
Posts: 13621


Kiss My Scythe

Blog entries (0)


« Reply #21: May 21, 2008, 10:57:36 am »

I came across a story somewhere where Noah deliberately didn't let the unicorn on the Ark because there was only one and he hated them anyway.

But it was a weird little story.  Not what I'd call a good source. Cheesy

I remember that as a child, people told me the unicorns missed the ark along with the dinosaurs and that's why they're all extinct.  Don't remember who said this though, as my parents didn't discuss it that much and when I developed my interest in dinos after seeing Jurassic Park, they didn't censer the "millions of years" part.

I remember an episode of Robot Chicken that made fun of this.
Logged



Jesus saves, Allah forgives, Cthulhu thinks you will make a great sandwich.
My Spiritual Blog
Sperran
Reserve Staff
Staff
High Adept Member
***
Last Login:October 18, 2014, 02:07:12 am
United States United States

Religion: Judaism
Posts: 2945


Adonai Echad

Blog entries (8)


« Reply #22: May 21, 2008, 11:48:35 am »

And if you're going to do that, be sure as hell you are on REPUTABLE websites, otherwise you end up with the drek.

This isn't a topic that you're going to get an answer on by reading the latest pop religion book or questionable website (and there are thousands).

I think the sacred texts website might be a good place to start.

Sperran
Logged
LyricFox
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:September 04, 2011, 02:39:11 pm
United States United States

Religion: Lapsed Hellenic Reconstructionist
Posts: 8959


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #23: May 21, 2008, 11:50:25 am »

I think the sacred texts website might be a good place to start.

Sperran

And something else to keep in mind, in the field of religion publishing, just having a university imprint isn't a good single judge of relaible content. I remember Koi telling me that a couple of years ago. Totally tossed me on my ear.
Logged

Visit The Breast Cancer Site & Click to fund free Mammograms
Hosts' Store: Doxy's Bazaar (w/Pagan Items)
Need Web Hosting? See The Cheap Web Hosting Report
Eadie
Master Member
****
Last Login:November 11, 2008, 04:19:38 pm
United States United States

Religion: Other
Posts: 628

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #24: May 21, 2008, 01:22:11 pm »

And something else to keep in mind, in the field of religion publishing, just having a university imprint isn't a good single judge of relaible content. I remember Koi telling me that a couple of years ago. Totally tossed me on my ear.

And the more recent bibles are being translated from the oldest and closest to original versions that can be found.  When I was confimed at 12 yrs old I received the Jerusalem Bible from my godfather.  It was a big thing then among Catholics (this would have been 1970) because the Jesuits had gone back to the eldest sources they could find and translated directly from the Aramaic and Greek and such into each language it was printed in.  Which made it a more accurate (and modernly accurate) translation.
Logged
sefiru
Master Member
****
Last Login:April 11, 2016, 07:41:55 pm
Canada Canada

Religion: Kemetic
Posts: 661

Blog entries (0)



Ignore
« Reply #25: May 21, 2008, 05:39:00 pm »

But you must admit that the misprints were much more a concern of distant past than the concerns of modern productions, i.e.--one might still have a legitimate argument regarding translation or interpretation but a modern copy of the Bible should be fairly free of typos.

Sperran

Unfortunately, in a book that's taken as seriously as the Bible, one typo is enough. (the Wicked Bible I mentioned above only had the one spectacular one.) With the number of typos I see in other modern printed works, I would not be surprised if one or two recent editions had such a slip.
Logged
Anda
Apprentice
**
Last Login:July 24, 2008, 03:11:08 pm
United States United States

Religion: Eclectic Wicca
Posts: 23


Blog entries (0)

WWW

Ignore
« Reply #26: May 21, 2008, 10:34:58 pm »


I understand your reservations, Sperran, but have seen many sources that credit Moses with Genesis through Deuteronomy (and have some pretty choice things to say about those who believe differently). It seems to me that both sides have about the same amount of evidence: very little and perhaps only coincidental or conjectural. In truth, we'll never really know. That's why I believe it best to approach this kind of topic with an unemotional, open mind. Most things said about the Bible, its subjects and its authors cannot be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. That's why it's still considered a religious text and not a documentary. Smiley


Wow, I did not expect such a smack! Shocked I tend to be the sort to read any source I can find... not merely those who are written or distributed by those that seem scholarly, but also others whose theories may have validity. The trick is to take everything that everyone says with a grain of salt. It probably helps that I'm Pagan, and therefore have no vested interest in whether or not Moses wrote Genesis, or whether the sin of Sodom was sexual deviance or a lack of hospitality (a translation and interpretation discrepancy that I failed to remember earlier). Either way, my faith is unmoved. But, it's my opinion that the faith of any person should be stronger than the texts that support it.

I appreciate the strong convictions of all who've weighed in, but hasn't the topic strayed from the original question? I don't think that Ember Angel was asking how we felt about these controversies, but rather if we could provide her with leads to learn more. (She also didn't post that she's Christian or otherwise dependent on an infallible Bible, or that her boyfriend approached the subject in a mean-spirited way, although I feel that some posters made that assumption.) Sometimes, we're too emotionally close to a subject to provide objective information... Just a thought...

Anda
Logged

"Hope is a risk that we must run." ~ George Bernandos


Anda and her Projects
RandallS
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:October 30, 2020, 08:18:05 am
United States United States

Religion: Hellenic Pagan
TCN ID: ADMIN
Posts: 17181


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #27: May 21, 2008, 10:43:26 pm »

I understand your reservations, Sperran, but have seen many sources that credit Moses with Genesis through Deuteronomy (and have some pretty choice things to say about those who believe differently).

About the only people who act like that are the Fundamentalists.  They are very loud (especially in the US), but actually are a minority in Christianity. There is no evidence for Moses as sole author and a lot of textual evidence for several authors.

Quote
I appreciate the strong convictions of all who've weighed in, but hasn't the topic strayed from the original question? I don't think that Ember Angel was asking how we felt about these controversies, but rather if we could provide her with leads to learn more.


Most of what she points out aren't really controversies so I can't help her by pointing her to more. You'll find this happens a lot at TC as we tend to be a bit more academically focused than many Pagan boards. Also, most of us lack the strong dislike/hatred for Christianity that many Pagans unfortunately have. It's not my religion, but then most of the world's religions aren't my religion.
Logged

Randall
RetroRoleplaying [Blog - Forum] -- Out Of Print & Out Of Style Tabletop Roleplaying Games
Software Gadgets Blog -- Interesting Software, Mostly Free
Cheap Web Hosting -- Find an Affordable Web Host
LyricFox
Co-Host
Administrator
Grand Adept Member
*****
Last Login:September 04, 2011, 02:39:11 pm
United States United States

Religion: Lapsed Hellenic Reconstructionist
Posts: 8959


Blog entries (0)


« Reply #28: May 21, 2008, 10:51:34 pm »


Wow, I did not expect such a smack! Shocked

That wasn't a smack. Trust me.

Quote
I tend to be the sort to read any source I can find... not merely those who are written or distributed by those that seem scholarly, but also others whose theories may have validity.

Then you have more time to waste than I do. I don't intend to spin my wheels on an author whose only claim to fame is he put pen to paper after reading a series of conspiracy theories. My interests lean far more to the academic and scholarly...as probably most of our members also do. This forum is a great deal more advanced than reading the latest modern neo-pagan author for historical information.


Quote
The trick is to take everything that everyone says with a grain of salt. It probably helps that I'm Pagan, and therefore have no vested interest in whether or not Moses wrote Genesis, or whether the sin of Sodom was sexual deviance or a lack of hospitality (a translation and interpretation discrepancy that I failed to remember earlier). Either way, my faith is unmoved. But, it's my opinion that the faith of any person should be stronger than the texts that support it.

Thank you for the educational lesson. Sorry, but I'm still not wasting my time on half-assed authors who don't bother with a peer review process.

Quote
I appreciate the strong convictions of all who've weighed in, but hasn't the topic strayed from the original question? I don't think that Ember Angel was asking how we felt about these controversies, but rather if we could provide her with leads to learn more. (She also didn't post that she's Christian or otherwise dependent on an infallible Bible, or that her boyfriend approached the subject in a mean-spirited way, although I feel that some posters made that assumption.) Sometimes, we're too emotionally close to a subject to provide objective information... Just a thought...

This board does this. If someone posts in, people will comment. That's the nature of The Cauldron.
Logged

Visit The Breast Cancer Site & Click to fund free Mammograms
Hosts' Store: Doxy's Bazaar (w/Pagan Items)
Need Web Hosting? See The Cheap Web Hosting Report
Sperran
Reserve Staff
Staff
High Adept Member
***
Last Login:October 18, 2014, 02:07:12 am
United States United States

Religion: Judaism
Posts: 2945


Adonai Echad

Blog entries (8)


« Reply #29: May 21, 2008, 11:17:15 pm »

I understand your reservations, Sperran, but have seen many sources that credit Moses with Genesis through Deuteronomy (and have some pretty choice things to say about those who believe differently).

I have seen many sources that credit global warming with the decrease of pirates.  I don't find sheer quantity very convincing.  Of course those folks have choice things to say about those that believe differently.  They are fundamentalists that believe the Bible is literally true, and go through all sorts of contortions to retain that belief...like believing that the earth is 6000 years old and dinosaur bones are some sort of divine test.  These are hardly the folks I would look to for quality scholarship.

Quote
It seems to me that both sides have about the same amount of evidence: very little and perhaps only coincidental or conjectural.

Close textual analysis and other historical records support the three compilers theory.  There is NO evidence supporting the Moses theory except what is written in Exodus.  And considering that the best evidence we can compile suggests that the great exodus from Egypt never occurred, nor that Moses actually existed, it is pretty easy to see which one is more likely.

Quote
In truth, we'll never really know. That's why I believe it best to approach this kind of topic with an unemotional, open mind. Most things said about the Bible, its subjects and its authors cannot be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. That's why it's still considered a religious text and not a documentary. Smiley

While we might not be able to prove the authors of Torah beyond a shadow of a doubt, we can certainly pick the theory that is most reasonable.  When there are three very different writing styles in the Torah, and very different versions of the same story (e.g. the creation of humanity) is it not more reasonable to follow the theory that states three different persons collected existing stories?

Quote
I appreciate the strong convictions of all who've weighed in, but hasn't the topic strayed from the original question? I don't think that Ember Angel was asking how we felt about these controversies, but rather if we could provide her with leads to learn more.

Part of the problem is that Ember Angel's questions were extremely vague, so it is difficult to tell if the topic strayed from the original question.  I also don't think that folks are just talking about how they feel; they are correcting misinformation.  Genesis doesn't mention Lilith because her story had not yet been developed.  I can't imagine that it would be very kind to suggest more places to research if we didn't correct faulty assumptions.

Quote
Sometimes, we're too emotionally close to a subject to provide objective information... Just a thought...

I suppose that is true, but certainly doesn't seem relevant in this thread.  I don't think that my responses, nor those of other posters were emotionally charged.  Perhaps this board has a different interaction style than you are used to; we aren't a fellowship group, and we aren't known for "making nice".  It has nothing to do with being "emotionally close" to topics.  It has to do with the fact that this is a serious, academically focused board and our bullshit tolerance is pretty low.  If people's facts are incorrect, we call them on it.  If they make assertions, we require proof for those assumptions.  Heated discussion and debate are pretty much the norm, and I don't expect that to change any time soon.

Sperran
Logged

Donor Ad: Become a Silver or Gold Donor to get your ad here.

Tags:
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Add bookmark  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  
  Portal   Forum   Help Rules Search Chat (Mux) Articles Login Register   *

* Share this topic...
In a forum
(BBCode)
In a site/blog
(HTML)


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Fake Wikipedia Post Fools Some in Media
Non-Religious News
Dara 2 1477 Last post May 13, 2009, 11:22:51 pm
by Dara
Fake caviar? Fight against ‘food fraud’ grows
Non-Religious News
LyricFox 3 1711 Last post March 30, 2010, 04:51:45 pm
by RandallS
Author: More teens becoming 'fake' Christians
Religious News
LyricFox 4 2314 Last post August 29, 2010, 09:27:57 am
by sailor_tech
Fake pimp from ACORN videos tries to 'punk' CNN correspondent
Non-Religious News
LyricFox 13 3236 Last post September 30, 2010, 12:49:08 pm
by Owl
Online Sources for Fake Flora and Fauna
Crafts and Hobbies
Satsekhem 3 2159 Last post January 17, 2011, 10:39:35 pm
by FierFlye
EU Cookie Notice: This site uses cookies. By using this site you consent to their use.


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines
TinyPortal v0.9.8 © Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.067 seconds with 47 queries.