Tweet
The Bible has a little bit of everything. It is a hodge podge of both myths, legends, history, as well as allegory from various cultures and groups. It is also one of the most influential works ever written.
Remember Christianity was a reform movement within the Pharisees ( not Judaism since back then there was no such thing as "Judaism" and it is only a modern term to signify that religion )that it was written at a time of political instability both with the intent of concealing secrets from the outside world, and from within, so there is alot of knowledge only initiates possessed and understood from the allegory.
Throughout time it has gone through many translations, tampering and changes and so one can expect different variations of how it is to be intepreted. Ironically present fundamentalist Christians who take the Bible literally, ignore the history of Christianity as it developed in the late Roman Empire. St. Augustine in his "On Christian Doctrine" as well as in "City of God" ( a text we read in class as part of our medieval coursework ), highlighted that the Bible should not be taken literally and the early Christians in fact understood the allegory and the message underneath the message.
The way the modern form of Christianity is practiced pales in comparison to how it was during its inception.
But what I am amazed at is the posts above that just make blanket assertions on preconceived notions of what they think the Bible is or ought to be. The best we can come up with is a guess, since no one totally knows beyond the surface, it's origin is clouded in secrecy and mystery. If you take the investigation far enough, you can see that there is no real evidence as to who wrote the New Testament books. One might say "Sure I know, it was Mathew, Mark, Luke and John". But then I am prone to ask, "Who are Mathew, Mark, Luke and John?". We have no description of who these people were, and if there is any contemporary evidence validating their existence, in souces outside of the Bible. The same applies for Jesus.
Remember Christianity was a reform movement within the Pharisees ( not Judaism since back then there was no such thing as "Judaism" and it is only a modern term to signify that religion )that it was written at a time of political instability both with the intent of concealing secrets from the outside world, and from within, so there is alot of knowledge only initiates possessed and understood from the allegory.
Throughout time it has gone through many translations, tampering and changes and so one can expect different variations of how it is to be intepreted. Ironically present fundamentalist Christians who take the Bible literally, ignore the history of Christianity as it developed in the late Roman Empire. St. Augustine in his "On Christian Doctrine" as well as in "City of God" ( a text we read in class as part of our medieval coursework ), highlighted that the Bible should not be taken literally and the early Christians in fact understood the allegory and the message underneath the message.
The way the modern form of Christianity is practiced pales in comparison to how it was during its inception.
But what I am amazed at is the posts above that just make blanket assertions on preconceived notions of what they think the Bible is or ought to be. The best we can come up with is a guess, since no one totally knows beyond the surface, it's origin is clouded in secrecy and mystery. If you take the investigation far enough, you can see that there is no real evidence as to who wrote the New Testament books. One might say "Sure I know, it was Mathew, Mark, Luke and John". But then I am prone to ask, "Who are Mathew, Mark, Luke and John?". We have no description of who these people were, and if there is any contemporary evidence validating their existence, in souces outside of the Bible. The same applies for Jesus.
Comment