BB FANS

I tend to aggree....my opinion is that considering the bible wasn't even written in a present day language, that over the years people could have just written whatever they wanted. Like a big long game of chinese whispers.

I remember saying at work a long time ago that all the blokes I like turn out to be b******* to one girl...by the end of the day it came back to me that I only want to go out with b******* because I like a man to treat me badly! Just an example.
And that was in just one day.

I suppose its a question of faith. I do find it very hard to believe though that someone could feed thousands on 1 loaf and a fish.

Agree with you Heidi.A lot of it is metaphor in any case...and is lost in translation.Even translating two modern day languages you can lose the subtleties in the text

I went to see the film this week and just thought i'd add a bit....

I thought it was a brilliant film - very moving and powerful and beautifully shot. Yes it was very graphic and barbaric in places, but that's what crucifixions were like, not safe and unchallenging and just words in a book.
There was only one bit i thought was unnessary and that happened to one of the other people crucified with Jesus. (he gets his eye pecked out by a crow).

Although people are saying its full of violence I thought it was full of humanity...particularly with the relationship between Jesus and his mother Mary. As a churchgoer it helped me understand a few of the subleties of why the Jews were so hacked off with Jesus at the time (they thought what he said was blasphemy and that was a massive offense to them). I don't think it was anti-Semitic.

However, I am conscious that I went to see the film as someone with 'background knowledge' and I would be interested to know what someone not linked at all with churchgoing would think of it.

Certainly though with regard to previous posts about translation, I think its remarkable that the stories surrounding Jesus survived being passed from generation to generation for about 30 years until they were written down, and when you read the gospels they are remarkably the same. OK, some of the gospel writers are supposed to have cribbed from each other, but when you think there were no computers, email, diaries or newspapers thats still pretty amazing that all the stories and eyewitness accounts survived.

bye for now

I saw it a week ago and thought it was the most original and extrodinary cinematic experience of my life, it is a journey through self belief. I highly recommend anyone to go and see this film. TH

In response to the messages to me, there are several historical writings about Jesus outside of the Bible. They also refer to many other people, events and social/historical references of the time which are echoed in the New Testament writings. The principal historian quoted is Flavius Josephus who wrote “Antiquities of the Jews” in the first Century (quoted below).

With regard to the authenticity of the Bible, it is a respected historical collection of writings as well as the world’s best-seller. There is more manuscript support for the NT than for any other body of ancient literature – over 5,000 Greek and 8,000 Latin manuscripts alone. As you would expect over the course of time and through human error small deviations do occur. However, this should not overshadow the overwhelming degree of agreement amongst the ancient records. (Baby with bathwater syndrome.)

Don’t forget that the Gospels were eye-witness accounts, so even if they were not written down immediately as events happened, they cannot be accused of being like “Chinese whispers”. There is remarkable agreement between the Gospels (over 100 major happenings are included in two, three or even all four books) and also in relation to the other NT texts.

If you want further information feel free to ask or PM me.

“Antiquities of the Jews” (Book XVIII, Chapter III): “Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

Like I said also....it's a question of faith.

I wouldn't say I'm an atheist, I would be more agnostic. I'm afraid I don't have as much faith as some to believe everything I read, wether it be the Bible or the News of the World. I find there is too much contradiction in the bible, plus just because something is supposed to be eye-witnessed, it doesn't prove to me that it is true.

I like proof to whole heartedly believe in something. Like I said....it's a question of faith.

i think the main problem with religion is that the people that believe in it are all too quick to shout down and discredit those that dont when all we that dont have a faith do is state what we believe, people get more passionate about religion than anything else (even politics ). If you believe it fine but I dont want it shoved down my throat thanks!

Agree completely with both of you...
am now off to consult The News of the World for guidance...

I agree...


Again I agree - all that we who do have a faith do, is state what we believe! I don't mean to shove anything down anyone's throat, only state a few facts that some may be unaware of. Sorry if I've offended anyone.

No problem.

(facts? lol)

Do you know what is a good film though?

Bruce Almighty! Do you reckon God really IS Morgan Freeman??

Fact:
NOTW p4,c2....
ROFL at edited text conversation transcript!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm referring to historical facts. There is no question over Jesus’ existence. The film portrays the story in modern media (with a rogue crow for added impact it seems!). It’s not appropriate to post the proof of evidence here which is why I only quoted one; I can provide more via PM if anyone's interested. Whether his existence has any implication is completely and absolutely individual choice, related to personal experiences and faith... so we’re full circle back to the f word!

aye so we are!

Okay heres how I see it!

God created the world, then Adam & Eve thus humankind is born!

In which case where do the dinosaurs and natural evolution from Apes to Humans come in??

I see evidence of the creation of the universe in museums, I can touch the bones of a dinosaur I can understand that the earth was created by an explosion I can understand that we evolved.

All this is fact backed up by evidence, I see no evidence of a higher being creating 2 people who then managed to populate the entire world... surely thats incest and we'd all look like something out of deliverance??