>Reading the bible as literal history
I do this
>>726974
What are the arguments against reading it as literal history?
>>727271
It's a really ancient source. That doesn't mean there isn't plenty of history in it, but you have to read it like Herodotus.
>>727277
*tips fedora*
>>727271
It's a fantasy novel for one...
>>727285
I'm a Christian
>>727289
It's a mostly prose narrative, but not a novel.
>>727290
And?
>>726974
There are parts of the bible that are straight up history. Like the Maccabees.
Much of it however is written Oral history. Specially the Old Testament. So there's folklore n shit.
Which is still equally important to historical study.
>>727271
Big Bang theory for one
evolution
and that's just Genesis
additionally there was likely no united kingdom under David and Solomon since it doesn't fit with the archaeological record. the first signs of a powerful kingdom in the iron age are walls built at Meggido and Gezer I believe, which date to the 9th century
>>727323
>He believes the "science" religion he's been indoctrinated into since birth
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
- Timothy 3:16-17
God has addressed many topics in His Book, and if God gives us facts on creation, science, history, it is always true.
But sinfulness of man keeps him/her from accepting (The Bible) from God.
>>727385
Amen
Even as a believer it's sometimes hard to believe in it because of the world around us has been set up to make us doubt it, but deep down we know it's true, even unbelievers, which is why they won't be spared in the second coming if they don't confess that Jesus is Lord. They heard the truth and didn't accept it.
But that's their choice
>>727374
>he believes the "christian" religion he wasn't even indoctrinated into but joined anyways because atheism wasn't as contrarian anymore
>>727331
Is the golden ass historical? That's how I /bible/
>>727271
The people who compiled it into a book didnt treat it as literal history.
>>729080
>He believes I wasn't a Christian for two years before I came to this website and has to make false unfounded accusations
>>727271
Think of all the reason's you don't believe the Qur'an is literal history and then apply them to the bible.
>>729128
False equivocation fallacy
>>729104
>lying on the North Korean interpretative dance forum
>>727404
eaten any shellfish recently?
>>729146
In what way? The Bible is a holy book, the Qur'an is a holy book ( based on the same source even ) they should be held to same standard.
>>727385
>God has addressed many topics in His Book, and if God gives us facts on creation, science, history, it is always true.
Even when it's verifiably false?
>>729228
Except the Bible is true, so they are nothing alike at all.
>>729237
>the bible is true because it says so in the bible
Wew
>trying to argue with people who openly admit that their position is based on 'faith'
>>729164
I haven't actually. What's your point?
Have you never heard of Jesus' death for the forgiveness of sins?
Wew lad
>>729249
>>trying to convince people when you openly admit that your position is based on 'faith'
>>729284
I've heard of it but I don't find the premises or claims convincing.
It sounds like an emotional appeal that required childhood indoctrination or pandering to desperate people.
Not to mention it's not argued in good faith, but instead openly biased. That doesn't engender goodwill toward the speaker.
>>729154
>Lel I'll just call him a liar. That'll show him
>>729303
Then why are you even bringing up shellfish?
You find that convincing do ya?
>>729316
Not him, actually, he was probably trying to call you a hypocrite for not adhering to a dietary rule maybe.
>>729312
>being butthurt about lying
>inb4 "i'll just call him butthurt, tht'll show him"
>>727271
Because the term "Torah" (the non-heathen true way of saying the Old Testament) literally means "guide" or "teach", and it is a moral book, not a historical text.
>>729340
>Maybe if I stick with it he'll stop replying and it will look like I won
>>729360
>being this mad about greentext bantz
>>729391
>implying I'm mad
>Being this pesistant when you have nothing to back up your claims
>>729471
You can't call him out for being "persistent" when you are also replying.
Didn't the parts after Exodus at least have some reliability?
>>729566
The earliest thing we have archaeological evidence for is King David.
Some of Judges and other parts of Samuel be mythologized history but we just don't have the evidence
>>729566
Exodus is one of those things with zero historical proof and a lot of evidense against it.
The Egyptians used payed labor for the pyramids, not slaves.
>>729475
Watch me
>>727374
>science
>religion
Choose one m80
>>729734
Religion (third definition):
a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance.
>>729471
>when you have nothing to back up your claims
It's my faith, don't need to back it up
>>726974
No-one does this except crazy American protestants and contrarian Christfags on /his/ (who are of course Orthodox because Protestantism is just too mainstream)
>>729740
>taking a figurative meaning literally
When people say something like "Dragon Ball Z is my religion," they don't mean that they worship Goku. They just mean that they really like the show, and that it takes up a large part of their free time. People loving science and pushing science above other things doesn't make science a religion.
>>726974
>period sources can't be considered historical unless I say so
>>727331
>Herodotus isn't a major primary source in academics
>>727323
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Megiddo#History
actually 1150 BC or so....in the 800 Megiddo was in decline.
anyways this is a tired meme, there's plenty of archaeological history for a Israeli kingdom during the early iron age. Fits well coming out of the late bronze dark age.
>>729804
It's full of stuff that has no support from other sources. Like the whole episode with Moses and the Pharaoh. There are not Egyptian sources mentioning the destruction of the army when the waters came together, the ten plagues, the exodus of the Jews, or even that the Jews were held as slaves.
These seem like things that would have been noteworthy enough to get recorded if they really happened.
Taking it literally is mostly retarded since we know of at least three different "Bibles" (the most agreed upon are the E source, the J source and the Priestly source, though there may be more)
Which means you have at least three different narratives, which oppose each other in many important parts.
>>729843
>implying they would want to record the nightmare of their superiorty delusions being smashed to pieces and being BTFO in general
>>727309
And you typed in "*tips fedora" as in an implication that he was an "edgy atheist". Someone who takes too much pride in being an atheist and is a huge faggot about it. This stereotype is set by the fact that anyone in that mindset likes to look "dangerous" by wearing a fedora, while failing of course. Also, he wasn't being edgy in any sense of the word, there is a difference between telling what you believe and being a prick about it, or trying to be something else.
>inb4 "You wrote all that."
It took a minute.
>>729861
The KJV is a word for word or literal translation.
>Be Christia
>Hey what should we call this book of stuff with the intent of explaining the origin of things but is really just a metaphor?
>what about Genesis? It sounds cool and has no etymological root with "generate", "begin", etc. Surely we'll convey that it isn't to be taken literally like other religions in our area or around the world.
>Sounds good m8.
>>726974
>Reading the bible
>>730001
It's not possible to have a 'word for word' translation, because different languages have different words.
The process of translation does not involve taking a word in language A, writing down its exact equivalent in language B, then moving onto the next word. There will be words in language A that do not have equivalents in language B. Or there might be several equivalent words in language B, each with slightly different connotations, and the translator has to pick one. There will be grammatical structures in language A that don't make sense in language B, idiomatic phrases that don't exist, etc.
There is no way you can have a perfectly literal translation of anything as complex as the bible. A street sign or a simple vocabulary list, maybe. But not a whole book. And that would be true even if you were talking about two similar modern languages. In this case you're talking about translating books into a radically different language, which did not even exist yet when those books were written.
Believing that it's possible to write a literal translation of the bible, and that it would sound anything like the KJV if you did, is literally more retarded than taking the bible literally.
>>729861
Only one is the real Bible.
>>726974
I can't believe El Risitas became a worldwide meme, not just a Spanish one.
>>727271
>What are the arguments against reading it as literal history?
The bible is a compilation of many different books of different genres. Not all of them are meant to be read literal history because they aren't historical texts.
>>727323
Do you have to wear a helmet?
>>730001
It doesn't even purport to be that.
>>729861
Let's you and I make up a "P" source, and then there's 4 to choose from! Yay! Mocking God is fun!
>>733550
Where the bible touches on history, it is true. Where the bible touches on anything, it is true.
There have been THOUSANDS of attacks on the historicity of the bible, and the bible has always proven to be true. For instance, there really was a Pontius Pilate. He really was an asshole. There really was a Hittite empire. There really was a walled Jericho. There really were cisterns big enough for men to sneak into Jerusalem.
Each and every attack on the bible fails. Every time.
>>733575
>missing the point
I didn't say anything to the contrary
I'm saying that not everything written is meant to be history. Genre is important.
>>733575
I swear most of the Christfags on this board are Atheist false flags
Check this out guys. It's pretty interesting
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rWAEY2fi7TU
