Ableton Forum

I have been searching really hard to find something that just gives the facts about how the bibe was written, who wrote it, and its accuracy, with out anyones opinion thrown in. Everything I have found so far has a lot of opinion on both sides.
Im not looking for anything by Dawkins because he seems to just be an expert in evolution and not in the historical legitimacy of the bible.

Example of what I have been seeing when watching history of the bible videos:
On the religious side you get the obvious hear say " we know this to be fact because so and so said so"
On the atheist side you get a lot of speculation " the bible is inaccurate because people copied the bible by hand and probably made mistakes"

I guess the "bible" was one of those taboo ancient books in Israel 2300 years ago. If for "the bible" you mean the Church corporation bestseller, with people killing other people, women raped, magicians and gore graphic content, it is just a load of bullshit put together by the state in order to control people in the 400-500 AD here in italy. Don't waste your time: read dostojevsky, tolstoj, bulgakov. Much better.

myrnova wrote:I guess the "bible" was one of those taboo ancient books in Israel 2300 years ago. If for "the bible" you mean the Church corporation bestseller, with people killing other people, women raped, magicians and gore graphic content, it is just a load of bullshit put together by the state in order to control people in the 400-500 AD here in italy. Don't waste your time: read dostojevsky, tolstoj, bulgakov. Much better.

You say it has been "put together by the state" are you saying the state wrote the bible or that they translated it and pieced it together.
If the state wrote the bible what evidence do you have to suggest that?

I saw a documentary about St. Paul not long ago, can't remember the title, but it was probably what you're after. He was the first to start writing some of it down so there is a lot of his own agenda in it.

Also Constantine ordered a lot of it taken out if it was a threat to power etc...

A lot of changes took place at the ecumenical congress of constantinople 5th or 6th C - this is what myrnova is talking about - the early cristians actually believed in reincarnation but they removed references to it because they knew it was easier to control people if they believed in punishment after death etc...

Someone was telling me about the gnostic texts the other day, that gives a very different perspective. They were saying Paul was originally a Roman spy deliberately trying to spread disinformation, and Jesus & co. were actually much more militant, but Paul made them look much more passive so people didn't get the idea to be militant. Apparently "Iscariot" actually referred to a group of assasins... all very interesting, but this is just from someone telling me so I don't know details except you could search "gnostics" or "gnostic texts"

the st. paul doc. might be this: David Suchet: In The Footsteps of St Paul

Forge. wrote: you could search "gnostics" or "gnostic texts"

Thanks, I will look into that.
I always have questioned "Paul"'s integrity knowing that he was not associated with Jesus until after his death.

Ep 1 & 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCOQeXYdOHs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmJ3Ab_gku0

already from recommended videos I can see other videos that look relevant:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uZ7usrRiEc

this looks like it could be interesting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_9MfFewdTo

Dead sea scrolls and the gospel of Judas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow6g_FmeqiY

I won't post any more as they are in the "recommended" list - but there is loads on there along these lines

Thanks

np.

also, the ecumenical councils were when they all got together and decided how they wanted it all to go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecumenical_council

The one I was talking about re: reincarnation was the 5th council in 553, but I've just been looking that up and it's just something I remembered from a long time ago and I'm not sure how solid the source is or how accurate, but you can see from the page just how much of it was decided politically in those councils

I'm more interested in why you want this...

nathannn wrote:

myrnova wrote:I guess the "bible" was one of those taboo ancient books in Israel 2300 years ago. If for "the bible" you mean the Church corporation bestseller, with people killing other people, women raped, magicians and gore graphic content, it is just a load of bullshit put together by the state in order to control people in the 400-500 AD here in italy. Don't waste your time: read dostojevsky, tolstoj, bulgakov. Much better.

You say it has been "put together by the state" are you saying the state wrote the bible or that they translated it and pieced it together.
If the state wrote the bible what evidence do you have to suggest that?

Yes, of course. It was put together by the state, because the roman empire had to control riots through religion, so Constantine I (roman empire) introduced christianism as the new state's religion, throwing away the old greek-roman gods. It was 300 AD ca. Nothing "spiritual" at all, it was just to calm the riots and control people. After a while the Church became powerful (see Charles Magnus) so the state and the church decided to share the power. It was because the war was too expensive, not for Jesus That was the period they introduced new superstitions in order to scare people and mantain the power. Don't believe in this bible's crap, it is just bullshit. Read Dostojevsky, Tolstoj, Bulgakov... listen to me.

Jack McOck wrote:I'm more interested in why you want this...

curiosity is not a good enough reason?

Funk N. Furter wrote:

Forge. wrote:I They were saying Paul was originally a Roman spy deliberately trying to spread disinformation, and Jesus & co. were actually much more militant, but Paul made them look much more passive so people didn't get the idea to be militant.

Even in the surviving Bible Jesus and co are clearly sort of primitive communists, and he lived in a time and place where many Jewish sects had a revolutionary position, so it's very likely.

Not to disappoint you, FnF, but so called "Jesus" were thousands there, like today the intifada kids and/or talibans against the U.S.A. empire. The romans used to crucify them everywhere, at least 100-200 a day. It was their "electric chair" Nothing "revolutionary" or "communist". Jesus (the one white people adore and paint blond and with blue eyes) was actually an ancient Osama bin Laden, rather fanatic. The "Jesus" of the bible is mere invention by the church, he is as real as harry potter

Forge wrote:curiosity is not a good enough reason?

Nope.