The Bible (a discussion)

Genesis 2:
4. These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, on the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.
5. Now no tree of the field was yet on the earth, neither did any herb of the field yet grow, because the Lord God had not brought rain upon the earth, and there was no man to work the soil.
6. And a mist ascended from the earth and watered the entire surface of the ground.
7. And the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and He breathed into his nostrils the soul of life, and man became a living soul.
8. And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden from the east, and He placed there the man whom He had formed.
9. And the Lord God caused to sprout from the ground every tree pleasant to see and good to eat, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.
10. And a river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it separated and became four heads.
11. The name of one is Pishon; that is the one that encompasses all the land of Havilah, where there is gold.
12. And the gold of that land is good; there is the crystal and the onyx stone.
13. And the name of the second river is Gihon; that is the one that encompasses all the land of Cush.
14. And the name of the third river is Tigris; that is the one that flows to the east of Assyria, and the fourth river that is the Euphrates.
15. Now the Lord God took the man, and He placed him in the Garden of Eden to work it and to guard it.
16. And the Lord God commanded man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat.
17. But of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat of it, for on the day that you eat thereof, you shall surely die."
18. And the Lord God said, "It is not good that man is alone; I shall make him a helpmate opposite him."
19. And the Lord God formed from the earth every beast of the field and every fowl of the heavens, and He brought [it] to man to see what he would call it, and whatever the man called each living thing, that was its name.
20. And man named all the cattle and the fowl of the heavens and all the beasts of the field, but for man, he did not find a helpmate opposite him.
21. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon man, and he slept, and He took one of his sides, and He closed the flesh in its place.
22. And the Lord God built the side that He had taken from man into a woman, and He brought her to man.
23. And man said, "This time, it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. This one shall be called ishah (woman) because this one was taken from ish (man)."

Now if you ask: It has already been stated (above 1:27): “And He created man, etc.!” I saw in the Baraitha of Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Jose the Galilean concerning the thirty-two principles by which the Torah is expounded, and this is one of them [method 13]: A general statement followed by a specific act, the latter constitutes a specific [clarification] of the first [general statement]. “And He created man.” This is a general statement. It left obscure whence he was created, and it left His deeds obscure [i.e., how God created man]. The text repeats and explains: “And the Lord God formed, etc.,” and He made the Garden of Eden grow for him, and He placed him in the Garden of Eden, and He caused a deep sleep to fall upon him. The listener may think that this is another story, but it is only the detailed account of the former. Likewise, in the case of the animal, Scripture repeats and writes (below verse 19): “And the Lord God formed from the ground all the beasts of the field,” in order to explain, “and He brought [them] to man” to name them, and to teach about the fowl, that they were created from the mud.

Smileyrius said: Romeo, you're missing the point of Jesus words...I prefer to take the advice of the Psalmist in Psalms 1:1-3

So answer me this, How much of the bible is wrong?

I acknowledge that your concerns are valid however I don't consider it a condemning article.

At the very least, you will concede that for a divinely inspired text, it lacks precision, consistency and clarity. It's the same thing for many other concepts and narratives. Eg the 10 commandments for which there are also several versions.

Neologist said: You do understand the words of Psalm 1, don't you? They do not contradict Jesus at all. They contradict you.

Quote:

At the very least, you will concede that for a divinely inspired text, it lacks precision, consistency and clarity. It's the same thing for many other concepts and narratives. Eg the 10 commandments for which there are also several versions.

It's [not] just that there are multiple versions but there are far more important ideas missing.

I suppose there would always been some missing idea in a short list f commandments, but what are you referring to?

Olivier5 wrote:

I suppose there would always been some missing idea in a short list f commandments, but what are you referring to?

Well before I get into answering that. I just want to explain how I think the whole story of the 10 commandments is so convoluted and it is clear they were thought up by a human and had NO god intervene what-so-ever.

So Moses supposedly goes up a mountain alone? Sounds like an excuse to hide something. "Hang on a minute guys, let me just go up there by myself for a little bit, I'll be right back."

So while he is up there he is having an interaction with god? Really? It doesn't make any sense. If this god is all knowing it would have known that even after dictating the commandments, once Moses returns to the base of the mountain he is just going to destroy them, so what would be the point in going through with creating them? But once again that didn't happen. It narrows the possible explanations down to just a few.

1. Either Moses made the whole thing up and he personally created the commandments himself. But why pretend as if a god dictated them to him? Because he needs something to empower them. If everyone knew he created them, they could be challenged but if he pretends a god created them, no one can challenge them.

2. This god is reactionary and has no ability to know the future events at all. This god would therefore not be all knowing but limited in scope to future events. This seems to be a reoccurring theme too in the bible. There are many places where god reacts to the situation as if he had no clue it was going to happen. Another good example of this is the Adam and Eve story. If he was all knowing then he HAD to know they were going to sin long before he even created them. Yet he pretends as if he is shocked they sinned against him. The tower of Babel is another reactionary story as well.

3. The whole thing is made up. There was no Moses and there is no god. It is just a way to try to slip in some laws and rules for naive Jews to follow or be murdered for disobeying them. This one sounds like the most plausible because of how the narrative plays out. Once Moses returns he witnesses a bunch of his people worshiping a golden cow? Really? They are so eager to worship something they just go through the process of constructing a golden cow? The story seems so contrived.

They had all the tools and equipment to construct a golden cow? They had all the materials there with them at the base of the mountain? How long was Moses gone? I find it funny that these people were so eager to be worshiping something that they immediately sprang into action creating a golden cow. Think about it. Even if Moses had been gone for months, how long after he was gone did they all of a sudden start wanting something to worship?

They would have had to have a small village set up at the base of this mountain for them to even have the ability to create a golden cow. Did they just have the gold on hand to spare too? It is obvious the story is contrived. Then on top of that Moses's reaction to seeing them worshiping the cow, so he destroys the commandments? Really? You just got done having a meeting with god over the establishment of some rules and then you destroy them because you can't stand to see your stupid people are so eager to be worshiping something.

It is clear the story is a fabrication.

Krumple wrote:

Olivier5 wrote:

I suppose there would always been some missing idea in a short list f commandments, but what are you referring to?

Well before I get into answering that. I just want to explain how I think the whole story of the 10 commandments is so convoluted and it is clear they were thought up by a human and had NO god intervene what-so-ever.

So Moses supposedly goes up a mountain alone? Sounds like an excuse to hide something. "Hang on a minute guys, let me just go up there by myself for a little bit, I'll be right back."

So while he is up there he is having an interaction with god? Really? It doesn't make any sense. If this god is all knowing it would have known that even after dictating the commandments, once Moses returns to the base of the mountain he is just going to destroy them, so what would be the point in going through with creating them? But once again that didn't happen. It narrows the possible explanations down to just a few.

1. Either Moses made the whole thing up and he personally created the commandments himself. But why pretend as if a god dictated them to him? Because he needs something to empower them. If everyone knew he created them, they could be challenged but if he pretends a god created them, no one can challenge them.

2. This god is reactionary and has no ability to know the future events at all. This god would therefore not be all knowing but limited in scope to future events. This seems to be a reoccurring theme too in the bible. There are many places where god reacts to the situation as if he had no clue it was going to happen. Another good example of this is the Adam and Eve story. If he was all knowing then he HAD to know they were going to sin long before he even created them. Yet he pretends as if he is shocked they sinned against him. The tower of Babel is another reactionary story as well.

3. The whole thing is made up. There was no Moses and there is no god. It is just a way to try to slip in some laws and rules for naive Jews to follow or be murdered for disobeying them. This one sounds like the most plausible because of how the narrative plays out. Once Moses returns he witnesses a bunch of his people worshiping a golden cow? Really? They are so eager to worship something they just go through the process of constructing a golden cow? The story seems so contrived.

They had all the tools and equipment to construct a golden cow? They had all the materials there with them at the base of the mountain? How long was Moses gone? I find it funny that these people were so eager to be worshiping something that they immediately sprang into action creating a golden cow. Think about it. Even if Moses had been gone for months, how long after he was gone did they all of a sudden start wanting something to worship?

They would have had to have a small village set up at the base of this mountain for them to even have the ability to create a golden cow. Did they just have the gold on hand to spare too? It is obvious the story is contrived. Then on top of that Moses's reaction to seeing them worshiping the cow, so he destroys the commandments? Really? You just got done having a meeting with god over the establishment of some rules and then you destroy them because you can't stand to see your stupid people are so eager to be worshiping something.

It is clear the story is a fabrication.

Nearly as I can see...the best possible guess about the Bible is that it is fiction and myth.

For you to suggest it is "clear" is another self-serving assertion. What you want to be so...you simply declare as so..

That is what the theist do.

You are behaving as unreasonably as a theist...simply coming to different conclusions.