:) good question. though from what i remember from before dropping out of sunday school, the old testament is part of the bible. it precedes the new testament, as it were. ;)
Printable View
:) good question. though from what i remember from before dropping out of sunday school, the old testament is part of the bible. it precedes the new testament, as it were. ;)
lol, I knew that :) but it seems like everyone had been discussing the Old Testament only, not the whole Bible. :D
I`m really sorry that I don`t bother to read everything you people have written here so I just say my own opinion on it and hope that exactly the same things hasn`t been said already.
I personally concider the bible to be a nice piece of reading, basically fiction. It`s as believeable as greek, egyptian or estonian myths. See, we have an epic Kalevipoeg and it is not so believeable piece of writing, so are the stories of the flood and noah`s ark. I believe that there might have been some events like that long time ago but if there were then they had nothing to do with god or miracles as the bible claims.
I`m sorry if I have offended somebody, I hope you don`t take it so seriously, it is only my opinion:)
But it is peculiar that people truly believe in the myths depicted in the bible....B´ut one has to believe in something. The people of Ancient Greek truly believed their myths. I think it`s just the mentality of our time, maybe a thnousand years later people think that where could they find a fool who would believe in such nonsense written in the bible.
There is a profound difference between the God of the bible and the mythological deities of other ancient religions. I think it is very interesting the apparent contrasts made between the God of the New Testament and the God of the Old Testament. While the OT does show a great deal of Gods wrath and his strict call to obedience, and the NT clearly shows a more merciful, compassionate, and forgiving God, they are not mutually exclusive. Gods Mercy and forgiveness are made plain in the OT as well as the NT. Some of the most beautiful examples of God's love and mercy are presented in the psalms of the OT. We also must not forget that Christ was not entirely passive either. he overturned tables at the church and took a whip to the vendors. He also caused the fig tree to wither simply because they were out of season. I think there is good reason that the bible is structure the way that it is. In the begining we are made aware that we are to be son's of God, and with this great honor comes responsibility, and this responsibility has consequenses for disobedience. "The fear of the Lord is the begining of knowledge"(Proverbs 1:7), However it is not the sum of all knowledge or the end of knowledge. To know God is to know your good and perfect father, strict when neccessary and steadfast in discipline, having high expectations for his children, yet full of love and all that love brings,(mercy, forgiveness, hope, compasion, etc.), for his child.
We must also remember that our physical existance is not the sum of our life, while the body dies, the spirit is eternal, with this in mind, death is not nearly as brutal as some believe, but mearly a form of transition toward a greater being. For those who belive that this life is all that we have, death most seam quite a horror, but as a believer in the Most High, I am confident that my death will be a passage into a glorious everlasting life free of the burdon of worldly temptations and evil. In this light there is no evil in the great catastrophies such as the flood, but merely a process of the development of a perfect knowledge of God and mans purpose and place in the universe. For as Job says "What is man that you make so much of him; that you give him so much attention"(Job 7:17) and "Does not man have hard service on earth?; Are not his days like those of a hired hand?" Learning is a process that requires us to move outside what makes us comfortable, it requires that we experience sensations that are not always pleasant. How many of us learned not to touch a hot stove by that first experience of being burned. It is not always easy to see the good that will come from the suffering we experience on earth, but considering how short our lives are relative to eternity, is it really such a great price for understanding, and a place in an everlasting kingdom of The Most Royal of Families.
IWilKikU:
The decline of ancient Babylonian, Canaanite, Egyptian, Greek, Roman, Norse and Germanic mythologies may be attributable to their failure to meet an important human need: the desire for a good afterlife. Both the Jewish and Christian faiths spoke of an afterlife that was not dependant on the moral achievements of men and women but on the grace of God. In the Christian faith, that promise of a good afterlife became a virtual guarantee upon the exercise of faith.
The presence of myth in any religion has never been a problem for intellectuals. Myth is a fictional attempt to communicate certain universal truths, usually about the origins of certain ideas, individuals or institutions. It describes the human condition as it is or could be. Myth is not history. History is the description of what actually happened.
Both myth and history are literary forms and vehicles of truth. Both involve the correspondence test of truth. With myth, the application is through the question: does what is presented accurately describe the human condition? Only the most ignorant of fundamentalist interpreters would confuse the image with its reference. When they do so, they commit the logical fallacy of confusing a metaphor with a truth. With history, the application is through the question: does what is presented accurately describe what happened?
A sovereign God is capable of using any literary form to communicate truth.
In my opinion, The Book of Job is a very good example of the literary form of myth or parable being used to present certain truths. You might check out http://www.bookofjob.org and especially the button "A Philosophical Analysis" to understand how an intellectual might use draw truth out of myth.
Dear Robert,
To get back to the original question:
'Does anyone think it's odd that all of the followers of the great mythologies (Greek, Roman, Norse, Egyptian, ect...) gave up their beliefs in these stories that they've been raised to believe in, but we still cling so tightly to Hebrew Mythology? These stories that we have from the Bible, -The Flood, Creation, The Tower of Babel, The Gospel- they basically are all just mythological stories that we have no evidence for except for the Bible itself. If someone found some ancient texts telling the story of Zues, we wouldn't cannonize it and reistate the ancient Greek religions. Why then do we put so much stock in the Bible and its' stories?'
Many believers, in fact I would dare to say most, accept the flood, creation etc as the literal truth. IWilkiku, is asking why, when most of these type of stories outside of Christianity, are regarded as myth. I agree with you that they persist because they carry a truth, but this does not explain why many people accept them as literal and not allegorical. You say this 'Only the most ignorant of fundamentalist interpreters would confuse the image with its reference.' I think this is a bit highhanded cos it really means that all these people believe as they do out of ignorance.
I disagree with this. Greek and Norse mythology had the best afterlife their followers could desire. For greeks, it meant green fields, silver creeks, and peaceful settings (i.e. Arcadia). For scandinavians, it meant an eternal (after)life devoted to the glory of battle and the honor to share meals and home with the All-father in Valhalla. Of course, these things weren't available to everyone, just to the ones who earned it, but that's not different from judaism or christianity. Also, these last ones do not offer a pleasant afterlife based solely on the grace of God. If you didn't do good deeds, you won't get the goodies of heaven, that's part of the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Sutherla
Crisaor:
I don't think that's an accurate representation of Greek, Roman and Norse religions.
You correct note that a parasidal existence is available for a limited few.
But you ignore Homer's and Virgil's accounts of hades and tartarus: a shadowy existence of unquenched desire at best (hades) and a place of painful torment at worst (tartarus).
And you ignore Ragnorak, the destruction of all things including Valhalla, which reduces any afterlife for the few to a temporary thing.
I don't. You mentioned the good side of the jewish/christian ethos, I mentioned the good one about greek and norse mythos. There is a jewish/christian hell you know...Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Sutherla
I don't. Or, in any case, I do, just as you ignored the Apocalypse. But just as the just will be separated from the wicked and live in the grace of God after the Apocalypse, the surviving gods and the offsprings of Lif and Lifthrasir will live forever happily in a new world free of evil under the rule of resurrected Balder. So, IMO, there is no meaningful difference between these religions in this subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Sutherla