Bible interpretations
By KaMlBob
@KaMlBob (786)
United States
March 1, 2007 3:57am CST
Do you think that the bible is just different interpretations and vague accounts of what the writers ‘think’ happened? The Bible spanned many, many years, how could people really have an accurate account of the happenings? It had to be translated from what? Hebrew into many languages and in translation isn’t it possible there are numerous mistakes or misinterpretation of words? How much of it is factual or is it just an elaborate storybook written to give us a sort of guide? I believe in God and I am not trying to discount the bible, I have always thought about this since childhood, just wondering what everyone else may think about how the bible came about and how it was written for us as a guide???
2 people like this
3 responses
@biznizman01 (581)
• Philippines
1 Mar 07
I'm not an authority of the Bible but this is what I know. The Bible is not just an inspiring or guide book. It is also a historical account of what happened in ancient times. Just to give you an example if you read it closely there are names of kings, dates when they reign, places mention in its pages. And when you look at other historical books they match with the names, dates, and places of this kings.
Soddom and Gomorrah was a place that is consumed with fire. I watch in a Discovery channel or National Geographic where they unearth a city. And this city has a lot of phosphorous everywhere. Phosphorous are the substance at the tip of a match stick. It means the city burn to the ground by fire as stated in the bible.
There was a group of explorer I think or scientist that found seashells at the top a mountain above sea level. Do you know what this suggested? It suggest that is high mountain is under water. It means the story of the great flood in the bible is true.
This are only some of the example of science validating Bible accounts. Jesus was a true person. There are manuscript other than the bible that suggest that He indeed walked the earth.
When it comes to interpreting the teachings, pray and asked for guidance so you may discern if the speaker is telling you the correct interpretation.
@kimwong (51)
• France
2 Mar 07
actually it's only the New Testament that was written after the event, and historians generally do think of them as historical documents. Quite a bit of what we know about the Romans is based on writings done several cennturies after the fact so if historians are going to say they are reliable then they also have to use the same criteria to the ancient documents of the Bible.
Of course a lot of history is dodgy anyway espically if it's over 1000 years old and can often be intpretive.
As for the Bible being true, I dont think this can be done scientificly. Science can say if something is old, but whether it can say something is true is another matter. Using Science to determine if something is true is a bit unreliable anyway, Science is changing all the time and who's to say that the scienticific method used today will not be disproved by a new method tomorrow, after all science 500 years ago was quite different and who knows what it will be like in 500 years time, it may disprove everthing that we belive now ... or not !!!
@2timothy (794)
• Philippines
1 Mar 07
Although the original manuscripts of the Bible no longer exist, today there still three (Vatican, Sinatic, and Alexandrian ancient manuscript) very old copies in the world which were among the fifty copies written during the time when Constantine was king in 330 A.D. Th church father Origen born in 185 A.D. quoted two-thirds of the entire New Testament in some of his books. The church father Tertullian born around 150 A.D. quoted 2,500 verses of the New Testament in his books and so does other church fathers like Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius in their writings. Therefore looking at the writings and books of these church fathers we can see that the New Testament verses they quoted are the same with the New Testament we are using today.
www.geocities.com/timothy_ah/Bible13.html
@michelledarcy (5220)
•
1 Mar 07
My thoughts are that is definiately a set of stories that have been changed so much through the years that none of them can be interpreted as factual at all.
1 person likes this
