CAN WE TRUST BIASED WRITERS? (The Bible Series)

[GildartsTale]

give me a religion that does not recruit followers, yung jesus nga sa bible panay travel recruit ng followers e

Your jumping conclusions. I said, give me empirical evidence that the Bible itself is a book of recruit. That's what I am asking. Unless your reading the whole context of the Bible, it's no where near a "recruit book".

no, those number of copies does not represent the number of scholars studying, so if for comparison lang ang purpose ng replication it should correspond to the number of scholars so they can compare their impressions

Hmmmm.. You don't even see how massive is the number of copies and how important it is to compare its reliability through textual criticism, and grammatical errors and so on. It's not just how many scholars who studied it but the method on which they where studied.

no, it is not the number of copies preserved, it is just the number of copies produced

Maybe you need a little bit of official research bro. It was preserve in different timeline. Some manuscripts are decades from the death of Christ, and then a hundred years later and so on. That's how they compare the manuscripts on different dates. That's is the reason for its accuracy.

existence of jesus can be true or let's say it's true but it is not the only thing that the bible claimed.
one true claim does not make all other claims true as well

"existence of jesus" being true does not correspond to "existence of god" being true, these are 2 different claims

Your jumping conclusions again. We are talking historical accuracy. And Christ existence and the bible. And the original OP was about biases. That's a different topic.

 

[plhbg1]

Your jumping conclusions. I said, give me empirical evidence that the Bible itself is a book of recruit. That's what I am asking. Unless your reading the whole context of the Bible, it's no where near a "recruit book".

followers of religions and followers of jesus mentioned in the bible are already the outputs of the recruitment process, we already have the result of the process

Hmmmm.. You don't even see how massive is the number of copies and how important it is to compare its reliability through textual criticism, and grammatical errors and so on.

no problem on seeing the massive numbers, ang problem is it does not suggest reliability at all but popularity, mas i-consider ko pa ang usage as basis of authenticity, it is not even one of the books used in history subjects of compulsory education where reliability is most needed

Maybe you need a little bit of official research bro. It was preserve in different timeline. Some manuscripts are decades from the death of Christ, and then a hundred years later and so on. That's how they compare the manuscripts on different dates. That's is the reason for its accuracy.

if you are just insisting the accuracy of each copy then this is acceptable, being copied properly is doable anyway

Your jumping conclusions again. We are talking historical accuracy. And Christ existence and the bible.

i still insist na ang bible hindi lang nag claim about christ existence, it claimed so many like god's existence, trinity of god, diety of jesus, heaven/hell presence, angel/demon presence, virrgin birth and all other magical claims so not credited pa din ang accuracy/reliability ni bible by just proving christ history and existence

 

[Misanthropy]

basta ako, gusto ko lang maging masaya. HAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

Jesus exists, yes. Pero nag-base ako sa history, not sa bible itself. Even though from the Bible, sinabing He exists, that is because may mga history rin na nakapaloob sa bibliya.

 

[Away From Keyboard]

yung Ethiopian orthodox bible scripture ata yung pure sa lahat nang versions.

 

[Asherah Goddess]

Lahat ng mga tao sa mundong ibabaw ay bias. Humans are not perfect na kahit nga ang mga historian at ang mga archeologist ay nagcocompete pa sila kung ang isa sa kanila ay mali o tama. Dina-debunk nila ang natuklasan ng kapwa nilang historian at kapwa archeologist katulad ng meron isang group na based on archeological findings na Jesus Christ exists at the bible is true while in other groups naman na based on archeological findings naman na Jesus Christ does not exist and the bible is a myth. It is a reason why na for me ay half truth and half myth ang bible. Kapag necessary lang ay kumukuha ako ng some quote from bible as long as nakakatulong sa akin pero hindi lahat ng content in bible ay ina-agree ko.

Ang kailangan diyan ay to believe is to see. Faith ang kinakailangan diyan. Maniwala muna bago makakita ng katotohanan. Meron nga kasabihan na “I believe that imagination is stronger than knowledge. That myth is more potent than history. That dreams are more powerful than facts. That hope always triumphs over experience. That laughter is the only cure for grief. And I believe that love is stronger than death.”​

― by Robert Fulghum.

Na realize ko na minsan useless na maghanap ng facts, useless maghanap ng evidence, useless ang dagdagan na dagdagan ang knowledge natin kung ano ang true sa hindi dahil mas victorious pa rin ang imagination ng tao na expand siya sa buong universe at extremely unlimited unlike knowledge ng tao ay limited lang and so hindi nakakapagtaka kung bakit ang mga tao na meron malakas ang faith sa Diyos ay sobrang lawak ng imagination nila na kahit hindi nakikita ng kanilang mata. Hindi man mataas ang intelligence nila according to survey at high intelligence ang karamihan na Atheist, ang imagination nila is stronger than knowledge for a Theist.

Faith ika nga. Faith.​

 

[plhbg1]

Maniwala muna bago makakita ng katotohanan.

does this apply to all aspects in life? or just about knowing god lang ito

 

[Sikapo]

Totoo po lahat ng sinabi niyo sana maging healthy ang debate po, wag po magalit

 

[Asherah Goddess]

does this apply to all aspects in life? or just about knowing god lang ito

Apply sa lahat ng aspeto sa buhay lalo na sa mga Theists.

 

[plhbg1]

Apply sa lahat ng aspeto sa buhay lalo na sa mga Theists.

so how do you explain the things you don't believe? kasi lumalabas dito na ikaw lang din ang nag break sa sarili mong rule, say theists don't believe in atheism so di rin nila nakita ang katotohanan doon same with atheists not believing theism at di rin nila nakita ang katotohanan sa theism

 

[Asherah Goddess]

so how do you explain the things you don't believe? kasi lumalabas dito na ikaw lang din ang nag break sa sarili mong rule, say theists don't believe in atheism so di rin nila nakita ang katotohanan doon same with atheists not believing theism at di rin nila nakita ang katotohanan sa theism

Papaano ko maipapaliwanag ang hindi ko pinapaniwalaan? Well, based on information na nababasa ko sa online at based din sa observation na nakikita ng aking mata.

To be honest, I admit na I am a human being na hindi perfect at nag bre-break ng rules. I admit also na I am a rebel but not to the extent na harmful ako in human beings. Based on my experience din na kapag too much knowledge and let us say- overloaded ang information na pumapasok sa utak ko na iba ang feeling. Feeling of not satisfied o not contented. There is something na within us na without peace but then again, human beings din tayo at nakakahagilap tayo ng lots of lots of information in a concrete world kung saan kapag nag rereflect tayo within ourselves, hindi tayo at peace. Its like there is something more within ourselves na we really can not explain unlike little children- children? Ang mga children is extremely inocent ang mga iyan so they are not like us na malalawak ang imagination nila. They are always happy. Full of joy na kapag ang bata ay na hurt, iiyak lang sila and after umiyak ay masaya uli. Inocent kase sila. Pure and wala halong bahid na makamandag na reasoning ni tama at mali ay hindi nga nila alam unless turuan kung ano ang tama at mali galing sa mas nakakatanda.

Totoo naman na theist o atheist ay hindi nila nakikita ang katotohanan ng bawat isa dahil ang based on truth is subjective din siya. Being objective is mahirap gawin- still subjective kase ang mga humans.

It is a reason why ang Buddhist like zen meditation ay they do not debate- mga ganun. Ang pagkakaintindi ko na through zen meditation ay need na maging kalmado ang utak para magkaroon ng peace. Not totally tanggalin ang lahat ng information sa utak pero nakakatulong siya kapag consistent meditation para hindi ma overloaded ng massive information ang utak natin lalo na araw-araw tayo nakakatanggap ng different information in a concrete world.

Iyon lang.​

 

[Away From Keyboard]

yung mga bata samin nag tiktok at di sila masaya sa ginagawa nila.

 

[Asherah Goddess]

yung mga bata samin nag tiktok at di sila masaya sa ginagawa nila.

Hahahaha Natawa ako. Pwede ba iyon? Nagtitiktok pagkatapos hindi masaya? Bakit pa sila nagtitiktok kung hindi sila masaya sa pagtitiktok? Hahaha Parang sinabi mo na naglalaro ang mga bata ng patintero at hindi sila masaya sa nilalaro nila and so bakit pa sila naglalaro ng patintero kung hindi sila masaya sa ginagawa nila? Grabe ka, hahaha Tipong ang logic ay ang mga bata na naglalaro ng video games pero hindi sila nag-eenjoy sa video games na nilalaro dahil hindi sila masaya sa ginagawa nila so bakit naglalaro pa sila ng video games? Wala lang. Funny lang naman.​

 

[NeoBased]

I am not caught up sa discussions here, but I want to add something. In every history class, the heaviest proof of something existing are first-hand sources. The Bible itself is a first-hand source, common misconception today is the Bible is written like a normal book, which it is not. It is a compilation of the many first-hand sources that existed (New Testament) and in the Old Testament, galing ito from many many translations, na ipinasa from centuries to centuries to centuries, and were thoroughly examined by INDEPENDENT people, and additionally, all were written by INDEPENDENT authors. I really can't articulate better, mas marami pang ibang tao makakaexplain ng mas maganda.

I feel like I was in the same boat as some people here. It's hard explaining the Faith, particularly the Catholic Faith to secular people kase you simply don't get it, like I did before. But if you are serious in your quest of knowledge, just don't get caught up in intellectual pride lang.

Here are some of the YT channels that helped me a lot, they approach Christianity in a way I know the skeptics would like. Namely; drcraigvideos, Discovery Science, Cross Examined, and a whole lot more.

Lahat ng mga tao sa mundong ibabaw ay bias. Humans are not perfect na kahit nga ang mga historian at ang mga archeologist ay nagcocompete pa sila kung ang isa sa kanila ay mali o tama. Dina-debunk nila ang natuklasan ng kapwa nilang historian at kapwa archeologist katulad ng meron isang group na based on archeological findings na Jesus Christ exists at the bible is true while in other groups naman na based on archeological findings naman na Jesus Christ does not exist and the bible is a myth. It is a reason why na for me ay half truth and half myth ang bible. Kapag necessary lang ay kumukuha ako ng some quote from bible as long as nakakatulong sa akin pero hindi lahat ng content in bible ay ina-agree ko.

Ang kailangan diyan ay to believe is to see. Faith ang kinakailangan diyan. Maniwala muna bago makakita ng katotohanan. Meron nga kasabihan na “I believe that imagination is stronger than knowledge. That myth is more potent than history. That dreams are more powerful than facts. That hope always triumphs over experience. That laughter is the only cure for grief. And I believe that love is stronger than death.”​

― by Robert Fulghum.

Na realize ko na minsan useless na maghanap ng facts, useless maghanap ng evidence, useless ang dagdagan na dagdagan ang knowledge natin kung ano ang true sa hindi dahil mas victorious pa rin ang imagination ng tao na expand siya sa buong universe at extremely unlimited unlike knowledge ng tao ay limited lang and so hindi nakakapagtaka kung bakit ang mga tao na meron malakas ang faith sa Diyos ay sobrang lawak ng imagination nila na kahit hindi nakikita ng kanilang mata. Hindi man mataas ang intelligence nila according to survey at high intelligence ang karamihan na Atheist, ang imagination nila is stronger than knowledge for a Theist.

Faith ika nga. Faith.​

Well, "Faith" refers to supernatural mysteries, like the existence of God for example. I will use Catholicism in this matter kase sila naman ang nag sulat ng Bible, no? (since you are referring to the New Testament) Now, you quoted Robert Fulghrum, a Unitarian Universalist minister, and Unitarian Universalisms beliefs are an antithesis to the Catholic faith. Thus, how can you use someone like him to dictate the whole definition of Faith to every Catholic that exists and have existed?

You believe that the Bible is half myth and half truth. This may be unrelated but, how can a mere human being infinitely smaller than a speck of dust in God's eyes, can even comprehend why someone omnipotent existed? Isn't that illogical? If someone built a computer, does he find himself in the computer? Hence, God isn't restrained to the rules of our world. God isn't God if he is restrained by space, time, and matter, he transcends it. An atheist cannot comprehend a theist's point of view, not because they aren't smart, but because they do not even believe in the first place, and do not even practice religion. I am not condescending but, a genuine question, how can you understand something that you are not even a part of and do not even practice? Point being is that how can someone who isn't a master of a specific matter decide that the experts of that matter is outright wrong. Paano ko mabibigyan ng advice ang isang med student in their medical studies kung wala naman akong koneksyon sa field ng medicine?

 

[Asherah Goddess]

Well, "Faith" refers to supernatural mysteries, like the existence of God for example. I will use Catholicism in this matter kase sila naman ang nag sulat ng Bible, no? (since you are referring to the New Testament) Now, you quoted Robert Fulghrum, a Unitarian Universalist minister, and Unitarian Universalisms beliefs are an antithesis to the Catholic faith. Thus, how can you use someone like him to dictate the whole definition of Faith to every Catholic that exists and have existed?

You believe that the Bible is half myth and half truth. This may be unrelated but, how can a mere human being infinitely smaller than a speck of dust in God's eyes, can even comprehend why someone omnipotent existed? Isn't that illogical? If someone built a computer, does he find himself in the computer? Hence, God isn't restrained to the rules of our world. God isn't God if he is restrained by space, time, and matter, he transcends it. An atheist cannot comprehend a theist's point of view, not because they aren't smart, but because they do not even believe in the first place, and do not even practice religion. I am not condescending but, a genuine question, how can you understand something that you are not even a part of and do not even practice? Point being is that how can someone who isn't a master of a specific matter decide that the experts of that matter is outright wrong. Paano ko mabibigyan ng advice ang isang med student in their medical studies kung wala naman akong koneksyon sa field ng medicine?​

Tinatamad ako mag-explain. Basta ang alam ko na subjective kang tao dahil theist ka malamang at lahat ng mga tao ay biased kaya nga meron tayo itinatawag na cognitive bias.

Basta ang akin ha? Maikli lang ito. Promise. Dahil ayaw ko na mag-explain. Ang God is subjective po siya. Hindi nakikita ng mata , hindi naaamoy ng ilong , hindi nahahawakan ng kamay at hindi nalalasahan ng dila dahil hindi siya concrete object kungdi subjective lang siya na galing lamang sa beliefs at faith. Walang proof kung di "to belief is to see" ang kanila. Iyon lang. Lahat ng hindi nakikita ng mata ay consider totoo siya.

Half truth and half myth dahil mas extremely bias kapag sabihin na 100% percent na ang the bible is true and ngayon ay matutuwa malamang ang theist diyan kapag sinabi ko na 100% percent na the bible is true nga dahil remember? Wala naman tayo knowledge about bible at religion noon diba? Kailan lang ba tayo nagkaroon ng knowledge (ayan na naman tayo sa knowledge na iyan , yung mga satanist diyan sa tabi-tabi ay nakasilip na sa post ko hahaha ) I mean wala naman tayo knowledge about Catholicism , bible and religion and lahat dati? E diba nang sinakop tayo ng mga Spaniards ? Na culture shock pa nga sila kaya ibinago din nila based on ideology ng concept of God na meron sa kanila.

Since tumatalino ang mga tao , nagkaroon din iyan ng archeological findings and research para malaman kung true ang bible o hinde. Both ay tiningnan ko , nakinig ako at napanood ko.

Ang resulta po kase ay ito. Yung mga nakikita nila na archeological findings at research is sa other groups katulad ng theist ay sinasabi na keyso totoo na nag-exist nga and the other groups na katulad ng atheist ay sabi na it does not exist or myth lang po siya. It means it depends sa tao na nagsasaliksik kung papaano nila ito iinterpret ang bible at sa ni re research po nila.

It means to say na ang God ay isang konsepto na ginawa ng tao (since subjective lang naman siya na hindi nakikita ng mata at based on faith lang naman siya ) according sa ideology ng God ng mga tao.

Kaya nga kung keen observer ang mga tao na hindi ba napapansin ng mga tao? Na sa more than thousand religion sa buong mundo at hindi exceptional diyan ang Catholicism malamang which is sobra siyang malapit in Paganism , well , kung mapapansin ng tao na maraming different personality ang God o maraming different concept of God sa iba-ibang relihiyon at mismong relihiyon din kung saan ang lahat ng tao na meron malakas ang faith ay being proud sila na ang maliligtas lang na relihiyon is sa kanila lang.

Iyon lang. It is a reason why na nasabi ko na ang bible is half myth and half truth dahil talaga lang. Kailan ba naging objective ang bible? Ang ipinagtatanggol ng ibang theist na hindi raw subjective. Objective kuno daw ang bible and ni isa nga theist ay hindi pa nila nakita kung ano ang itsura ng God nila. I still consider that God and bible is extremely subjective po siya.
​

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

Na realize ko na minsan useless na maghanap ng facts, useless maghanap ng evidence, useless ang dagdagan na dagdagan ang knowledge natin kung ano ang true sa hindi dahil mas victorious pa rin ang imagination ng tao

Mas marami sa reality ng buhay ng tao ay affected by imaginations than the facts. Ung facts about things gaya ng DNA, molecules, universe, etc., wala nmn siya tlgang use sa normal na tao in their daily life. Most of the things we know are not from direct observation. Kadalasan, mga bagay na nabasa o narinig natin, and we just fill in by imagination. We consume stuff like medicine, and food without having to care about the ingredients, but just believing the manufaturers account of how it will affect you. We also deal with a lot of abstract concepts more frequently than material realities. Kagaya ng phone mo halimbawa, you dont really care much about the internal components, but more on the software stuff. Kagaya din ng website na ito (phcorner) where we all "meet" which in reality is just a bunch of 1's and zeroes saved in a computer somewhere we dont really care about it's material identity.

It is a reason why ang Buddhist like zen meditation ay they do not debate- mga ganun. Ang pagkakaintindi ko na through zen meditation ay need na maging kalmado ang utak para magkaroon ng peace. Not totally tanggalin ang lahat ng information sa utak pero nakakatulong siya kapag consistent meditation para hindi ma overloaded ng massive information ang utak natin lalo na araw-araw tayo nakakatanggap ng different information in a concrete world.

Agree. Dapat din nmn tlga ang Christianity ganyan din parang zen bhuddism. I dont know where exactly it went wrong. Madami siguro kasi mga christians ang nag insist ng literal truth ng mga bagay sa bibliya. Which was not the case before the 1800's.

An atheist cannot comprehend a theist's point of view, not because they aren't smart, but because they do not even believe in the first place, and do not even practice religion. I am not condescending but, a genuine question, how can you understand something that you are not even a part of and do not even practice? Point being is that how can someone who isn't a master of a specific matter decide that the experts of that matter is outright wrong. Paano ko mabibigyan ng advice ang isang med student in their medical studies kung wala naman akong koneksyon sa field ng medicine?

This is true. But i think the real problem is the prerequisite of having to believe(literally). The illusion that most atheist have that "faith" is supposed to contend with "science".

I find it crazy, most people would put the Bible's truth in a lot of scrutiny without giving it consideration, pero pag nagconsume sila ng mga fantasy based literature, like movies and books, they don't even care about it's literal truth.
They dont are to even study the Bible, likely because it is hard to understand. But, they would involve themselves in things like politics, lovelife, economics, which are also concepts, which are also things that requires an open mind to understand.

I'm an atheist too, but it is sad to say, most atheist nowadays don't really have an open mind as they claim, but simply worship their opinions too deeply. Their atheism just morphed into another belief system, just more prone other's dangerous beliefs. Maybe I was just never religious enough to turn to that kind of atheism.