Express your nature.

Upload, Share, and Be Recognized.

Join with Facebook
or join manually

Old Comments:

2008-02-11 22:10:06
I believe the word you're looking for is "historian" :). The reason why I'm making such a big deal out of the date the bible was put together is because the council had a lot of books to choose from, but they only chose those. I'm sure the ones they chose reflect the personal opinions of the people in the council, so in a way you can consider the bible to reflect the beliefs and practices of the people at the time of the council.
2008-02-11 20:47:43
Bob1: I believe we are both right :) . You're right, that Bible isn't 2000 years old. Canon of Bible was issued on Council of Carthage in 397, and then reaffirmed on Council of Trent (1546). So, Bible that we know today is 1600 years old (or less than 500, if someone prefer later date). But what I'm trying to say, that all parts of Bible are older (some much older) than that. So, I think that Bible itself is older. If we speak about New Testament: I think I was wrong. Scientists (historist? I don't know suitable word, as I'm not English native-speaker) believe that the whole NT was written after Jesus died.
2008-02-11 06:56:52
I missed one word there when I proofread my post. The first sentence should have read, "Actually, Bob1, you assume that my message is directed exclusively at the bible." To clarify further, I don't feel I am attacking Christianity, or any religion directly. You are welcome to observe whatever belief system you like, and I hope that through whatever you believe, you are more comfortable with the fact that eventually all life ends; as an atheist, I am comfortable with not believing in religious myths, even under "threat" of eternal damnation.
2008-02-11 06:42:53
Actually, Bob1, you assume that my message is directed at the bible. It has already been mentioned by other people above that the Old Testament is made up of the books of the Torah, but even the religious stories of ancient Israel were based on myths that were written down by other cultures as early as 4000 years ago. While the Bible is certainly a book that has been used by idiots (I'm actually being kind, I could say it was *intelligently designed* to be used by idiots, but I won't) it is not the first, nor is it the worst, of what I call the 'religion for dummies' books. Maybe when you saw the word 'idiot' so close to the word 'bible' in my post, you believed you saw an attack on Christianity and snapped without thinking... but that's okay, I forgive you.
2008-02-11 05:54:23
You're right, I wasn't clear enough. I was talking about the bible itself (As a collection of books) being younger, and the books of the new testament (what makes the bible unique) are younger. You said SOME parts of the NT were written many years after jesus died... are there any that weren't? Also, you can't say that the bible is 3200-2000 years old... just that some parts are that old, while others are younger. Seeing how the bible itself was put together much later after jesus supposedly died, I'd say that the bible itself is that young.
2008-02-11 05:26:10
Bob1: You're not right. Bible consist of two parts: The Old and The New Testament. First five parts of The Old Testament are called Torah, and they are basic of Judaism. Jesus was a Jew, ergo they had to be around before him. Yes, Bible isn't 4000 years old, but less than 2000 y.o. neither. The oldest parts of Old testament are belived to be written about 1200 yeras before Jesus was born. So, Bible is 3200-2000 years old. And I have to admit, that some parts of New testament were written many years after Jesus died.
2008-02-11 04:22:24
Some people were offended by the rape, incest, and murder that the Bible has in it; I'm sure this book has less of those things in it.
2008-02-11 02:01:34
They've had idiot guides to prayer for over 4000 years, now. How is this book better than the bible?
2008-02-11 01:27:39
We have this at the store i work at :)