The bible is not historical fact (salvation, soul, America, myth)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Referencing Bible prophecy automatically places you on shaky ground. Prophetic passages almost always tend to be symbolic, cryptic and quite often debatable ....
In other words, the Bible is not historical fact, which is what I said. If the Bible says that Egypt will be desolate for 40 years but that is symbolic then then it isn't historical fact is it?
Quote:
Essentially, you're simply providing your own personal interpretation of these prophecies.
I'm not interpreting anything. I'm just repeating what the Bible says.
Quote:
You're free to correct me, but I don't see anywhere that Nebuchadnezzar was predicted to destroy Egypt to the extent that it would be uninhabited for 40 years.
Then I will correct you. This is Zeke's prophecy regarding Nebby. This is what is going to happen......(Zeke 9, 10, 11, 12)
"Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia. No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years."
"And I will make the land of Egypt desolate in the midst of the countries that are desolate, and her cities among the cities that are laid waste shall be desolate forty years: and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations, and will disperse them through the countries."
Quote:
Should we accept that this time period and prophecy has already been fulfilled - or is it yet to be fulfilled???
Nice try at apologetics but clearly the prophecy is against the Pharaoh as we clearly see in Zeke 2....
"Son of man, set thy face against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and prophesy against him, and against all Egypt":
....so unless you foresee a time when Nebby is to be raised from the dead to lay waste to Egypt and Egypt dismantles its political system and goes back to being ruled by Pharaohs again, I suggest you are just clutching at apologist straws.
Quote:
If you truly regard this passage as a primary reason for dismissing the Bible, well, you're most definitely on very shaky ground indeed.
The thread is about whether or not the Bible is historical fact. In your own word you have told us that some things could be metaphorical or symbolic. If this is the case then it can't be historical fact. You cant have it both ways pal.
Quote:
Specifically, where does the Bible date the flood to 2300 BC?
It doesn't but it can be dated by Bible chronology. The Date of Noah
Quote:
Secondly and perhaps more importantly, why are you of the apparent opinion that the flood was a world wide event?
Because your Bible claims that the highest mountains were covered and every living thing was wiped from the face of the Earth. How could that happen if it wasn't global?
So, why is it that some people still think the bible is 100% fact? Most Christians think that the bible is a great historical reference, when in fact it is a terrible one.
Take Noah's flood? If the flood did happen when the bible said it did, explain Egypt? How was Egypt untouched?
There are so many things in the bible that the bible scholars still feel are accurate, but historical evidence proves otherwise.
The Old Testament and New Testament are historical facts.
The ancient Egyptians came from Ham, a son of Noah.
In other words, the Bible is not historical fact, which is what I said. If the Bible says that Egypt will be desolate for 40 years but that is symbolic then then it isn't historical fact is it?
I'm not interpreting anything. I'm just repeating what the Bible says.
In the Bible, metaphor is to be taken as metaphor, prophecy as prophecy, symbolism as symbolism, poetry as poetry and historical narrative as historical narrative. The Bible is a book. It is to be understood using the same rules of logic and language as would be the case with understanding any book. Some of the Bible contains prophecy, other parts contain poetry, other parts historical narrative. Is it perhaps too much for me to expect that you would understand this concept?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
Then I will correct you. This is Zeke's prophecy regarding Nebby. This is what is going to happen......(Zeke 9, 10, 11, 12)
"Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia. No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years."
"And I will make the land of Egypt desolate in the midst of the countries that are desolate, and her cities among the cities that are laid waste shall be desolate forty years: and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations, and will disperse them through the countries."
Nice try at apologetics but clearly the prophecy is against the Pharaoh as we clearly see in Zeke 2....
"Son of man, set thy face against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and prophesy against him, and against all Egypt":
....so unless you foresee a time when Nebby is to be raised from the dead to lay waste to Egypt and Egypt dismantles its political system and goes back to being ruled by Pharaohs again, I suggest you are just clutching at apologist straws.
Apologetics? In this case, I would tend to characterize this discussion as more like a differing of opinion over Biblical hermeneutics. I did not categorically state that the prophecy did not or could not apply to Egypt at the time of the pharaohs - I simply asked how it is that we can know for sure one way or the other. As stated, there has been debate among scholars as to whether or not the 40 years is to be taken literally - let alone the issue of ancient or possible future applications that could possibly be inferred. However, I am willing to keep an open mind. I ask again, why should I or anyone else be inclined to accept your view?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
The thread is about whether or not the Bible is historical fact. In your own word you have told us that some things could be metaphorical or symbolic. If this is the case then it can't be historical fact. You cant have it both ways pal.
Yes, I'm quite aware of the title and nature of the OP - thank you very much "pal." Also, as I explained above, the Bible contains metaphor, prophecy, poetry and historical narrative. It strikes me as only logical to effort a proper contextual interpretation - I don't know, call me silly, but that's my view.
If you will recall, my question to the OP (and still unanswered by the originator of the thread) concerned his assertion of "historical evidence" that contradicts scripture, which is the post you responded to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
It doesn't but it can be dated by Bible chronology.
...and why do you apparently concur with the assessment of the chronologists? What do you find to be compelling about their argument?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
Because your Bible claims that the highest mountains were covered and every living thing was wiped from the face of the Earth. How could that happen if it wasn't global?
... and which version of "my" Bible would you be referring to? Are you trained and credentialed in the study of Biblical hermeneutics? What is your understanding of the various intricacies involved in interpretation of the old Hebrew text and language usages?
Keep in mind that you are the one jumping out here basically asserting yourself as some sort of Bible expert. I think it only fair for me to expect you to explain your assertions and back them up with evidence. Not all Christians are dedicated "YECers." There is, and has for some time been controversy within the Christian community concerning the nature and extent of the flood described in Genesis.
Not all Christians are dedicated "YECers." There is, and has for some time been controversy within the Christian community concerning the nature and extent of the flood described in Genesis.
So, why is it that some people still think the bible is 100% fact? Most Christians think that the bible is a great historical reference, when in fact it is a terrible one.
Take Noah's flood? If the flood did happen when the bible said it did, explain Egypt? How was Egypt untouched?
There are so many things in the bible that the bible scholars still feel are accurate, but historical evidence proves otherwise.
Oh please, the dates for the flood are all over the map. So naturally if you don't want to believe the flood occured you choose the date that agrees with you. However, how are you going to explain the recent finding made by the team from China? That large structure just found near the top of Mt. Ararat.
Ezekiel promised Egypt to Nebby as compensation for his failure to destroy Tyre. Nebby was to ransack Egypt so thoroughly that it would be uninhabited for 40 years. Can you point out when Egypt was ever so desolate and wasted that neither man or beast passed through it?
Then perhaps we could go on to this Bible flood which the Bible dates to around 2300 B.C.E. If we look at the list of recorded Egyptian Pharaohs we see........
If anyone says it is wrong it just proves they probably have a 6th grade education or less.
So, are we to ignore that the records of Ancient Egypt are false? Seriously? Some of the things in the bible could have actually happened. Historians and science have helped in that regard. The thing is, it was not written down right away. The Bible was written over a period of 1500 years by more than 40 different authors living on 3 different continents. What I find really funny is that God spoke to people in biblical times. Why not today? If someone says that they speak to God, everyone thinks they are crazy. Some of these people are sane people who claim God told them to do something, sometimes good and sometimes bad.
Truth is, there is no actual proof of who wrote the bible. It very well could have been a nut job. Here is my theory: For thousands of years people of in ancient times believed in many Gods (polytheism). During those times, they would make sacrifices and pray to certain Gods. Depending on how the day was they would decide if the Gods were happy, sad, or just plain pissed off. When the Gods were pleased, the people would rejoice and keep doing what they were doing. When the Gods where sad or angry the people would make sacrifices of plants, animals and even humans (in desperate times they would sacrifice babies, very sad). They would do these rituals, sacrifices and offerings until they believed the Gods where happy. Problem is... they had multiple Gods. While some Gods might be pleased, others would not be. They had to decide what God(s) was mad.
After a few thousand years or so they got tired of guessing what God they pissed off or were sad. They have stories of the Gods always feuding and killing each other. Then one God, in what I am assuming was an epic battle took control of the other Gods. He became the ruler of the Gods.
The only proof of this mythological theory is the bible. Here is the interesting part, ready?
The Bible states...
psalms 82:1 - God has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment.
And of course the first commandment:
"You shall have no other gods before me."
It never actually states that there are no other gods. It only says that we shall worship, praise, and honor no other gods before him. Doesn't say we can't, just that they come second to him.
I'm not saying nobody should read the bible. I actually recommend it. It is a great parable. It teaches valuable lessons, some relevant to the times, others not so relevant.
The Old Testament and New Testament are historical facts.
Well yes, they are "historical facts" in the sense that they are both real, man-made works of fiction plagiarized off of earlier religions, myths and religious texts.
As a source of actual historical facts, ehh no. They fail miserably in that dept.
Quote:
The ancient Egyptians came from Ham, a son of Noah.
There was no Noah. That's the name the Bible's authors gave to the flood character in their version of the flood myth they shamelessly copied from the Sumerians.
In the Bible, metaphor is to be taken as metaphor, prophecy as prophecy, symbolism as symbolism, poetry as poetry and historical narrative as historical narrative.
Thank you for confirming that the Bible is not historical fact.
Quote:
Apologetics? In this case, I would tend to characterize this discussion as more like a differing of opinion over Biblical hermeneutics. I did not categorically state that the prophecy did not or could not apply to Egypt at the time of the pharaohs - I simply asked how it is that we can know for sure one way or the other.
Well I've shown you how.
Quote:
As stated, there has been debate among scholars as to whether or not the 40 years is to be taken literally - let alone the issue of ancient or possible future applications that could possibly be inferred. However, I am willing to keep an open mind. I ask again, why should I or anyone else be inclined to accept your view?
You don't have to accept it. You may continue to believe in mythology for as long as you wish.
Quote:
...and why do you apparently concur with the assessment of the chronologists? What do you find to be compelling about their argument?
I gave you the link. You tell me why it doesn't work.
Quote:
Keep in mind that you are the one jumping out here basically asserting yourself as some sort of Bible expert. I think it only fair for me to expect you to explain your assertions and back them up with evidence.
I have.
Quote:
Not all Christians are dedicated "YECers." There is, and has for some time been controversy within the Christian community concerning the nature and extent of the flood described in Genesis.
Indeed there is. As science uncovers more and more and the the silly Biblical tales about global floods and towers that reach the skies are shown to be silly myths, Cghristians are now changing their stance on what they have always demanded was 'true'.
The Bible categorically states that it was a global flood. We know that THAT is impossible and therefore the Bible is wrong....not historical...not fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
Swimmies.
Huh??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
