The Bible rumors

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 14 times

The Bible rumors

Post #1

Post by Elijah John »

Do you believe the Bible rumors about God? The negative ones, like Him condoning slavery, or Him drowning babies in the Flood?

Do you believe rumors against the people in your life that you love?

Do you believe the worst that's said about them? Or the best about them.

For debate,

How can anyone who claims to love God believe the worst things said about him, i.e. the negative Bible rumors?

(apologies to DI for the term "rumors" I borrowed for this post ;) )
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 817 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #81

Post by nobspeople »

onewithhim wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:39 am
nobspeople wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:11 am
Elijah John wrote: Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:07 pm Do you believe the Bible rumors about God? The negative ones, like Him condoning slavery, or Him drowning babies in the Flood?

Do you believe rumors against the people in your life that you love?

Do you believe the worst that's said about them? Or the best about them.

For debate,

How can anyone who claims to love God believe the worst things said about him, i.e. the negative Bible rumors?

(apologies to DI for the term "rumors" I borrowed for this post ;) )
Can't most, if not all, thing written in the bible be consider rumors (talk or opinion widely disseminated with no discernible source; a statement or report current without known authority for its truth)?
Are there facts written in the biblical stories about god that can be shown to be factual and true?
One could consider legends passed down by word of mouth (aka the telephone game) rumor.
Rather or not one believes and or accept these rumors depends on ones' bias and needs at the time, I'd suspect.
The best proof we can obtain is (1) looking at the awesome creation and (2) comparing sacred books from the various religions. If we have come to think that if a God created us, then he would undoubtedly want his creations to know about him and somehow communicate with him....then we would be comparing the several means of communication---the sacred books---to see which makes the most sense. I have done that and have come to see the Holy Bible as the sacred book that makes the most sense. Of course a person would want to study it closely, and will see how much more noble and true it is than other sacred books. It takes time and energy, and most people don't want to bother....they just want to criticize.

There are many facts within the Biblical stories that have been shown to be true. Take a look at the many editions of the magazine Biblical Archaeology Review and see how accurate Bible stories are. So much has been found to corroborate Biblical stories.

.
Surely there are things listed in the bible that are true. My question was pertaining to things considered 'miraculous': raising of the dead, water into wine, demon possessed men, etc.

Surely that 'best proof' is good enough for many. Seems to me, it sets a low bar for such a supreme deity which, in part, allow for 'rumors' and stories. Again, perfectly fine for many.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 7440
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 629 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #82

Post by onewithhim »

[Replying to nobspeople in post #82]
The beginning of life itself is a miracle. Something coming from nothing is absolutely miraculous, and science agrees that there was a "big bang" during which life was created. If we can accept that, which we have to, because we are here....then we can accept that miracles have happened since then.

I don't think it is fair to criticize God for a confusing sacred book. If we go back to the original languages it is not confusing. Men have made it confusing by translating from more recent languages (like the KJV being rendered from the Latin Vulgate), and not going back to the original languages. When a translation team does go back to the original languages they are made fun of because they are a bit different from the KJV, for example. It takes time and energy to do research on the many translations, and an Interlinear Bible is quite helpful.

.

User avatar
Difflugia
Guru
Posts: 2288
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1832 times
Been thanked: 1356 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #83

Post by Difflugia »

onewithhim wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:39 amThere are many facts within the Biblical stories that have been shown to be true.
"Many of the things you say are true" is a rather backhanded compliment, don't you think?

That aside, I'm pretty sure that anything confirmed by BAR is unlikely to be one of the "facts written in the biblical stories about god" to which nobspeople refers.
onewithhim wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:39 amTake a look at the many editions of the magazine Biblical Archaeology Review and see how accurate Bible stories are. So much has been found to corroborate Biblical stories.
Yes, let's.

The Exodus is one of those narratives that is central to the historicity of the Old Testament, yet entirely lacks archaeological support. Still, those with an interest in validating the Bible in some way keep trying to find ways to somehow massage the text, the archaelogical data, or both in order to find parallels that seem valid in the right light and with just enough of a squint. As luck would have it, last quarter's BAR issue offers just such an example.

The article "Does Archaeology Confirm Joseph's Time in Egypt?" from the Fall, 2021 issue (47:3) paints the pattern of broad parallels, but widely discordant details as folk history. For the author, this is a confirmation of the Bible's relationship with history, but it comes at the cost of being even remotely what any conservative Christian would mean by "confirmation" (or "corroboration"):
The later parts of the larger narratives are similar as well, although here is where an inversion takes place. In the Bible, the numerous descendants of Joseph and his brothers are enslaved by a later pharaoh, until they escape and return to their original homeland of Canaan—chased by the pharaoh and his army (Exodus 14:6–9). Egyptian sources similarly indicate that when the local Egyptian kings finally became strong enough to take power (first Kamose, at the end of the 17th Dynasty, and then his successor Ahmose, first king of the New Kingdom), they forced the once-powerful Hyksos to flee Egypt and return to Canaan—and Ahmose’s army chases them all the way into Canaan. While the reasons for the action are somewhat diff erent in the two accounts— slave rebellion versus overthrowing a disliked dynasty—in both cases a large group of people of Canaanite origin leaves Egypt for Canaan with the Egyptian army at its heels.

But how do we reconcile that glaring major difference: the biblical slave rebellion with people leaving Egypt because they want to, as opposed to Egyptians chasing out an infiltrating dynasty by force? If we continue to think in a broad sense and allow for a cultural memory that morphed over several generations of retelling, the differences fade. In the biblical version, a people who originated in Canaan (descendants of Joseph and his brothers) were affiliated with the ruling class in Egypt until they were literally enslaved. But there is a type of “enslavement” in Egyptian New Kingdom history as well: During the 18th Dynasty, the former Hyksos, that is, the residents of Canaan, were “enslaved” by Egypt in their own land—Canaanite cities were subjugated and became vassals serving the Egyptian king.

What if the descendants of some of these Hyksos, those who survived the wars and returned to live in their ancestral land of Canaan, passed down to their children and grandchildren the stories of their rise to power in Egypt? They might have also passed down the stories of Kamose’s and Ahmose’s wars against their cities, but rather than remembering their military losses, they may have conflated it with what happened next: They inverted the defeats and conquests of Canaanite cities into a narrative of personal servitude with Egyptians as slavemasters. There are scholars such as Donald Redford and Ronald Hendel who say that this is exactly what happened. Biblical stories about Joseph living in Egypt could actually be folk memories of the period of Hyksos rule, while the narratives about slavery and the Exodus are folk memories of the expulsion of the Hyksos and the Egyptian conquest of Canaan. Canaanites were “enslaved” in their own land, forced to serve Egypt.
The article concludes:
This is why the “folk memory” theory works so well—as the relationship between Canaanites and Egyptians evolved over the course of four centuries, the narratives about the relationship evolved as well, until it solidified into the folk memory that comes down to us via the Book of Exodus.

These long-lived folk memories are traumatic national events turned on their sides.

While there is a lot more to say about the origins of the Exodus narrative, the stories of Joseph and his brothers are clearly rooted in the rise of the Hyksos in Egypt.
So, lest I put words in your mouth, are "cultural memory that morphed over several generations of retelling" and "long-lived folk memories" what you mean by things that corroborate Bible stories?
My preferred pronouns are he, him, and his.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3191
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 817 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #84

Post by nobspeople »

onewithhim wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 12:06 pm [Replying to nobspeople in post #82]
The beginning of life itself is a miracle. Something coming from nothing is absolutely miraculous, and science agrees that there was a "big bang" during which life was created. If we can accept that, which we have to, because we are here....then we can accept that miracles have happened since then.

I don't think it is fair to criticize God for a confusing sacred book. If we go back to the original languages it is not confusing. Men have made it confusing by translating from more recent languages (like the KJV being rendered from the Latin Vulgate), and not going back to the original languages. When a translation team does go back to the original languages they are made fun of because they are a bit different from the KJV, for example. It takes time and energy to do research on the many translations, and an Interlinear Bible is quite helpful.

.
The term 'miracle' used here is rather ambiguous and, as such, is your own definition which no one is under obligation to follow.
Same is said of your 'sacred book' - your own definition which no one is under obligation to follow.
While I respect your POV, it's not one that everyone shares or is required to share, as I'm sure you're in agreement with.
None of this negates criticisms of god - at least for many.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 7440
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 629 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #85

Post by onewithhim »

Difflugia wrote: Tue Dec 21, 2021 5:20 am
onewithhim wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:39 amThere are many facts within the Biblical stories that have been shown to be true.
"Many of the things you say are true" is a rather backhanded compliment, don't you think?

That aside, I'm pretty sure that anything confirmed by BAR is unlikely to be one of the "facts written in the biblical stories about god" to which nobspeople refers.
onewithhim wrote: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:39 amTake a look at the many editions of the magazine Biblical Archaeology Review and see how accurate Bible stories are. So much has been found to corroborate Biblical stories.
Yes, let's.

The Exodus is one of those narratives that is central to the historicity of the Old Testament, yet entirely lacks archaeological support. Still, those with an interest in validating the Bible in some way keep trying to find ways to somehow massage the text, the archaelogical data, or both in order to find parallels that seem valid in the right light and with just enough of a squint.
It is interesting that the majority of students of the Exodus continue to rely on an old, recently discredited version of just where the Exodus took place, after leaving Egypt. Just about everyone says that the popular spot of Mt. Sinai (which was claimed by Constantine's mother) is the Biblical Mt. Sinai. There is no archaeological support there because that isn't the actual Mt. Sinai. The route supposedly followed by Israel is all wrong. If we go to the other arm of the Red Sea---the Gulf of Aqqaba---we will find remnants of the Egyptian army at the newly-examined crossing point in the Red Sea. From there there are match-ups between the landmarks and the Bible's account. So....people are looking in the wrong places.


Your article from BAR is interesting as well. I have a hard time giving it credence, however, when I am under the impression that Moses wrote the book of Exodus when the Exodus was seemingly occurring. So the idea of a story being passed down over centuries doesn't really hold up.
.

User avatar
Difflugia
Guru
Posts: 2288
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 1832 times
Been thanked: 1356 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #86

Post by Difflugia »

onewithhim wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:16 pmIt is interesting that the majority of students of the Exodus continue to rely on an old, recently discredited version of just where the Exodus took place, after leaving Egypt.
What exactly are you claiming has been discredited and by whom? How does that change the utter lack of archaeological evidence for the Exodus? Archaeologists of the ancient Near East are no longer "students of the Exodus" or some such, but are "students" of the entire history of human settlement in the region. No archaeological evidence of over a million Israelites has been found anywhere in the Sinai Peninsula. According to the Bible, they camped in the same place for roughly forty years. If you're going to claim that the evidence of the wandering Israelites has been overlooked, then you're going to have to identify somewhere that could support such a settlement, yet has somehow escaped archaeological excavation.
onewithhim wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:16 pmJust about everyone says that the popular spot of Mt. Sinai (which was claimed by Constantine's mother) is the Biblical Mt. Sinai. There is no archaeological support there because that isn't the actual Mt. Sinai.
That's an interesting conjecture, but even if that were true, there's still no archaeological evidence of the Exodus anywhere else.
Trying to explain this lack of evidence as what one should expect of a group wandering around a desert is more question begging than a valid objection. Furthermore, such a solution ignores the fact that according to the Bible millions of people were involved! Surely, if this event as described in the Bible actually happened, something of the presence of so many people would have turned up by now, if nothing more than camp sites with datable pottery. (Archaeology and the Bible, John C. H. Laughlin)
If they've searched the whole neighborhood, claiming they got the house number wrong isn't much of an argument.
onewithhim wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:16 pmThe route supposedly followed by Israel is all wrong. If we go to the other arm of the Red Sea---the Gulf of Aqqaba---we will find remnants of the Egyptian army at the newly-examined crossing point in the Red Sea. From there there are match-ups between the landmarks and the Bible's account. So....people are looking in the wrong places.
The necessary corollary is that people have not been looking in the right places. There are so many "Exodus was somewhere else" speculations that I've no idea which one you have in mind, but maybe you'll tell us. Which path did the Israelites take that somehow avoided all subsequent archaeological investigation?
onewithhim wrote: Wed Dec 22, 2021 4:16 pmYour article from BAR is interesting as well. I have a hard time giving it credence, however, when I am under the impression that Moses wrote the book of Exodus when the Exodus was seemingly occurring. So the idea of a story being passed down over centuries doesn't really hold up.
So, you were telling us to read Biblical Archaeology Review, but you only meant the articles that you agree with. That clarifies things quite a bit.
My preferred pronouns are he, him, and his.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 7440
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 629 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: The Bible rumors

Post #87

Post by onewithhim »

[Replying to Difflugia in post #87]
I have researched the route of the Exodus as much as it can be, I think, and I believe that Constantine's mother was off by hundreds of miles in her conclusion that Mt. Sinai was where most people think it is today, still in Egypt. If you want to reject books written on this subject (pinpointing another Mt. Sinai)....The Exodus Case by Moller, and The Gold of Exodus by Blum...for example, I think a thesis paper written for a doctorate degree by Glen A. Fritz might pique your interest. He did intensive research for his paper, and it makes sense to me. He calls it "The Lost Sea of the Exodus, A Modern Geographical Analysis." He and another PhD, Ron Tottingham, present the same evidence, that the Exodus didn't go down the side of the left arm of the Red Sea but crossed along the highway to the north of the wilderness, a route commonly taken in those days by both caravans and the army. They went across to the Gulf of Aqaba, the right arm of the Red Sea, and to Nuweiba, about a fourth of the way down the Gulf of Aqaba. Wadi Watir is where they came out of the mountainous region and onto the vast beach area where they felt trapped with the Egyptians on their tails. That is when the sea opened and they went across. Pieces of chariots have been found in the sea here.

When the Israelites got across, they went to Jabal al Lawz, a mountain that many generations of Arabs have referred to as "the Mountain of Moses." All the places they went are named in the Scriptures and line up with what the Bible actually says.

So, Paul actually says that the mount Sinai is in "Arabia." (Galatians 4:25) It could not be on the Sinai Peninsula and line up with what the Bible says.


I'm sure you would find the information from Dr. Fritz and Dr. Tottingham quite interesting. They do not agree with Constantine's mother. Why should we?? I hope the following info on them is helpful:


"The True Red Sea Crossing to the True Mount Sinai" by Ron Tottingham, PhD, LitD, 2008, Faithful Life Publisher
s, North Fort Myers, FL, 33903 (FaithfulLifePublishers.com)

The Lost Sea of the Exodus by Glen A. Fritz, 2006, Instantpublisher.com (www.AncientExodus.com)

I have to say that my own research does not align with what the Watchtower has published about this. They are still going with Constantine's mom. So what I have said is my own opinion, not the WTS.

.

Post Reply