What marks the Bible different imo is its diversity. It's comprised of an astounding number of books with different styles: mythology, novels, historical, epistles, poems, wisdoms...
What is your opinion?:cornut:
Printable View
What marks the Bible different imo is its diversity. It's comprised of an astounding number of books with different styles: mythology, novels, historical, epistles, poems, wisdoms...
What is your opinion?:cornut:
I agree about the New Testament. It's a compilation of as much as they could dump into it from all those things you mentioned and more. There is a fragment for anyone, and mostly contradictory ones. I has been the greatest tool of manipulation and disinformation that was ever produced.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackCat
It's a wonderful piece of literature. The many different genres is one of its greatest appeals.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackCat
I must disagree with you there. From a Christian point of view as well from a historical one, the Bible was compiled with full consciousness. Remember they were trying to determining which books are inspired by God, not making baloney. About the contradictions, yes, there are some, but many can be resolved with philosophy and theological studies. Also many of the so called "contradictions" are not at all contradictory, some were often taken out of context. In regard of whether or not it is one of the greatest tool of manipulation and disinformation was ever produced, I think that is your opinion. I wonder though how can it be disinformation since its purpose is to reveal the nature of God, and since none really know God but by faith, what informations it could possibly misinform.Quote:
Originally Posted by cafolini
With that out of the way I'm not here for a theological discussion, I have plenty over those Catholic forums, I'm here to analyze the Bible and other sacred scriptures from a literary perspective.
The gospels were written by the community for the community. They were designed as articles of faith and not historical documents. There is no need for historical documents when you are writing for people of the time not 2000 years in the future. Articles of faith were to teach Christians their faith and provide guidence in how to live, something which a 100% historical accurate document would not give them.
The gospels were quite diverse as between 30 and 80 years after Jesus death they came from places such as Rome and Greece, showing how fast Christianity did spread in the beginning. They also provide a strong feeling of the communities at that time unlike many other sacred texts.
To my opinion I think maybe the Gospels served both purposes. We know from historical records that the Gospel miracles were already preached by the disciples and the apostles long before any pen was laid. It did indeed serve as an article of faith, guidance, and probably a wielding sword against Gnosticism. But maybe they were also historical accounts given through the eyes of each community. The Gospels serve as functional tools to help us understand the differences in each Christian communities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dante
but yes, and I think what make the Bible in particular more peculiar in comparison is the usage of history as teachings, the usage of novels as doctrinal guidances.
Edited your post slightly.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackCat