History teaches that the stories were written after being shared orally, then collected. NT books were chosen with an agenda to make Christianity the dominant religion in Rome. If you disagree, why? Please, no vague answers. No, "Satan spread doubt" or "Lies!  All lies!".  I want to know WHY you do or don't trust the history, and WHY you believe your own opinion.  I'm looking to promote thought, not ignorance.
126913
I have faith that the Bible really was written via the INFLUENCE of the Abrahamic god, but not necessarily at the time it was written. It didn't start being actually put into written text until centuries after the life of Jesus, and therefore MUST have been shared through oral tradition over generations. As that CAN be a reliable source of information, on the other hand, did you ever play "Telephone" in elementary school: one person says a sentence or phrase into one person's ear, and that person repeats what they heard to the next person, and than that person repeats it to the next person, and so on, and it never comes out exactly how it started. Maybe Yahweh started the game, and after generations of playing "Telephone," it just got a little mangled.\n\nPlus, have you ever tried to translate anything EXACTLY from one language to another? It can't be done: words that exist in some languages don't exist in others, and vice versa; not to mention the varying sentence structure from language to language.\n\nThen, of course, the Roman Catholics had to go and alter it for their own control-the-masses power hype, and screwed it up even more. Let's face it: we're human. We’re fallible, and so is the Bible.
59876
Hm attacking the author of a book for his creativity. So the book is fiction. You do realize that there are those that claim your new testament is fiction as well, right? Im might tell you as well not to believe everything you read. Right? I want to know why you think Dan Brown needs professional help, amanochev. What leads you to make such an intolerant and vapid statement? Bred2B, people could say the exact same things about the bible. Pure fantasy. Why is it blasphemous? Its a novel. Dont tell me youre starting to act like someone published a cartoon of sorts...People have freedom of speech and expression. Dan Brown wrote an entertaining book, that millions have enjoyed. Blasphemy? Dont you think thats a wee intolerant...And maybe a little dumb sounding? LIke it could have been said centuries ago? Im just curious. In the meantime, heres a post of mine, I think some of you should read.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqkU6qiSgh7Cn30xkZZXD8fsy6IX?qid=1006022602143\nBeruch hashem
370258
Well, history verifies my theology, (Christianity), so I'm not sure how to respond. One supports the other in my case.\nEDIT:\nHistory is HIS STORY
70509
The article is interesting, but it seems to have some flaws. It was too long and involved to read carefully, but I skimmed the points it was trying to make. One that jumped out at me was worshipping on Sunday. The article says we do that because the Pope said to. The fact is that the earliest church worshipped on Sunday. Paul says the day doesn't matter, as long as we worship.\n\nAnother problem is that the Bible tells us that once the antichrist comes to power, we only have 7 years left before the end. The catholic church has been around for far longer than 7 years!\n\nThere are more, but I'm a very slow typer, so I'll let it go at two.\n\nI have a big problem with some of the catholic beliefs, but I really don't think this article should be taken seriusly. When I have more time, I am going to look at it more closely, though.
133108
You can say the same thing about the bible.  Other than faith there is nothing to say it is true just because some of the stuff mentioned existed in that time doesn't make the whole book true.
607154
well, you have to keep in mind that the stories in the bible are probably misconstrued. if i tell you a story, and you tell it someone else, etc, eventually its going to change somewhat. now, those stories are from 2000 years ago or more, back when the only ppl that could write were the richest most powerful ppl. and the first thing that the bible teaches us is that man is flawed. so, wouldnt it make sense to think that those stories are at least a little bit incorrect from how they started? as in jesus asking why he was forsaken. we dont have any real evidence that it happened. \n\nthat all said, i think that the idea of the holy spirit was what god used when he needed to intervene in human affairs, without having a corporeal form.
318877
yes, that part is true.  The whole conspiracy thing is nonsense though.  The bible has been edited, translated and twisted many times.  There is still a huge debate between christians.  Some believe you should take the bible litteraly (i call these people retarded), others think it is symbolic.  I think it is all a bunch of crap either way you look at it.
406793
we know jesus existed because the romans wrote the history of that time. they were the dominant power and were not fans of jesus or the jews, or any other sub-group of that era. you'll recall that they were the ones who actually crucified him at the jews request. also they persecuted the jews and other religious minorities after the death of christ. rome would be a pagan government for quite some time after the death of christ. your concern is over whether or not jesus was a divine being. did he do the things that are written? was he who he claimed to be? not did he exist. the victors of that period wrote their historys and acknowledged jesus.
294788
True to the first sentence.  I disagree with the second.  There no "one book" that will make everyone think.  It's different for each of us.  \n\nIn addition, from what I've experienced, many who read the bible faithfully tend to say they don't question their faith.  If you read a book and you're not supposed to question it, doesn't this mean you're not thinking too much??
660768
Yeah , maybe we should tell then to read something else, anything else.\n\n"How do I know, the Bible tells me so." It has nice stories and its ok to believe whatever you do. I wish people would be more open to finding out what is really true and what isn't. Would you believe every word of the "Weekly World News"? "The New York Times.?Nazis?\nAny one source?
315174
No. I tried very hard. Verse by verse. The more you read the more convinced you are of the cover-up. Religions (islam and judaism as well, not only christianity) are scams. Why do you think everybody writing against religions is under a ton of threats? When you hold the truth you are not afraid of anyone talking about it...are you? If you are running a scam...you behave like they do now with DaVinci Code movie out. They are afraid so there's your answer about truth and the bible and the nothing in common they have.
180490
Funny how religions cling to their books screaming it is historical until something is found to disprove it.  Then they say history is crap.  \n\nYou just can't win against the brainwashed.
453013
Two of the most meticulous record keepers of Ancient Times were the Romans and the Jews, and as you rightly point out, the events recorded in the Bible somehow seemed to escape their notice.  Pontius Pilate's court records still exist, and there is no mention of the trial of Jesus or of the supposed custom of allowing the crowd to free a prisoner.  It is a tradition among the Egyptian Coptic's that their Church was founded by the Apostle Mark, in 42 ad, certainly the first major Christian Chatecal School was in Alexandria, but not until 190, so there could have been several generations worth of revisions.  Hadn't heard that one about about the Sun metaphor, Jesus didn't even get a nimbus in religious art until the 5th century, and then it was part of political deal the Emperor was cutting, The three main religions in Rome at the time were Christianity, the scribes and record keepers, Mithra ism, the army, and Sol Invites (the Unconquerable Sun), the wealthy landowners.  He couldn't afford to make any of them mad, so he declared Mithra and Jesus were two names for the same being, and that YHWH was another name for Sol Invictus.  That is why the rays of the Sun became a Christian symbol of holiness.  The Bible, in it's current form, only dates back to the Vulgate, which was completed in 405.  Personally, I think we should go back to traditional values, this new fangled Christianity stuff just ain't working out.
335361
Sparky First let me say I appreciate the 10 pts. I don't know what I did to piss you off though. I told you to look up the work "Qumran" because it is one of the best documented archaeological finds in the world and I knew that there would be plenty of info online (which would be convenient for you). Would you rather me refer you to the dozens of books that I know of offhand or to an infinite # of archaeological reports that are incredibly boring to read? I studied Qumran under Jodi Magness at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and she is the foremost American Archaeologist in the world concerning the "holyland." In particular, she is definitely the foremost authority on Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found.  In case you don't know, archaeology is SCIENCE, not religion, and archaeological reports and finds are scientific and are not at all connected to the Church or any religion.  \n\nNothing in my answer to you dealt with religious dogma, I simply tried to answer your question as to why SOME Christians see a threat in the DaVinci code. Now, as for your claim that the bible was written 200 years after Christ, well that's true for some of the later NT books, but not of the Gospels. Some of the gnostic texts were much later than the gospels, which is part of the reason they were rejected by the church. \n\nAnd lastly, you claim that the bible has changed so many times that it's all crap. What do you have to support this? Go see the Dead Sea Scrolls some time, which were written between 2500-2000 yrs ago (as I visited a DSS exhibit about a month ago in Charlotte, NC). And then compare that to the KJV or the American Standard Bible.  The Old Testament found in the 1950s in the Caves near Qumran is nearly word for word with what we have today.  It is amazing that in 2000 or more years the Jewish text has changed so little!  This means that we should all reexamine the amount of credit we have granted the Jewish oral tradition that was so important to the early Christian Church.  IT IS ACCURATE, whether you want to admit it or not. SCIENCE and HISTORY support that.\n\nAgain, I answered your question rather well... Let me try one more time in FIVE SIMPLE SENTENCES that will be very easy for you to comprehend this time:\n\n1.  It wouldn't be so bad if Jesus was married.\n\n2.  Christians are NOT offended or threatened by the possibility that Jesus could have been married.\n\n3.  It's simply not historically true or believable, from the bible and from the writings of two Roman historians Tacitus and Josephus.\n\n4.  However, Some Christians ARE offended by the notion that Christ was not Divine; and the "The DaVinci Code" claims his having a child is proof that Jesus was NOT divine.\n\n5.  Such a claim can be damaging to the mission field because people like you believe anything and everything you read in a novel or see on TV and are therefore hostile toward Christianity.\n\nSo, that's why some Christians are offended by the DaVinci Code and by the notion that Christ might have been married to and had a child with Mary Magdalene.  Because of the hostility towards Christianity that such false belief creates.  People like you work directly against anyone trying to bring people to Christ.  \n\nPS.. the whole "MM was a whore" lost in translation thing.. do your history research man, you don't know what you are talking about at all.  You speak fiction and pass it off as truth. \n\nAnd you wonder why people would be offended?  maybe some people just like the truth?\n\nLet me ask you a question.  Why are you so offended by Christianity?  What are YOU afraid of?  The Truth?
268471
Yes, I support this view.\n\nI think all the religious texts have some wisdom in them, but you can't take them literally.  Some bits were written just for that time and aren't applicable, some are true bits of wisdom that stand the test of time.  However all to me is just nice stories to tell a message/moral, not history.
608747
Do you people not realize that "Jesus" was just a man like any other man. Historical facts. Let me guess, the bible? The word of "God"? What did they hold a press conference so that they could get all the facts from "Jesus" and print them in one "historically accurate book"? I don't think so. I'm sorry but the bible is nothing more than a person or group of peoples perspective on a point in time. \nJesus was a human being! He had needs and desires just like every one else. Religion doesn't want to admit that because what, it will make him seem less "God like"? \nI think you people need to re-read the book. Yes "The Da Vinci Code" is a work of fiction. But I believe that a lot of the historical premises is based in truth. To what extent I don't know. The same with the bible. There may be a lot of truth there, but just like so much other written history, facts get lost or changed to suit the intentions of the author. \nCall it what you will, but I like to believe that maybe, just maybe the bloodline of Christ still exist out there today. What would be so wrong with that?
633511
This controversy has existed from the very beginning, and\nthe writings of the "Church Fathers" themselves reveal\nthat they were constantly forced by the pagan\nintelligentsia to defend what the non-Christians and other\nChristians ("heretics")4 alike saw as a preposterous and\nfabricated yarn with absolutely no evidence of it ever\nhaving taken place in history. As Rev. Robert Taylor says,\n"And from the apostolic age downwards, in a never\ninterrupted succession, but never so strongly and\nemphatically as in the most primitive times, was the\nexistence of Christ as a man most strenuously denied."5\nEmperor Julian, who, coming after the reign of the\nfanatical and murderous "good Christian" Constantine,\nreturned rights to pagan worshippers, stated, "If anyone\nshould wish to know the truth with respect to you\nChristians, he will find your impiety to be made up partly\nof the Jewish audacity, and partly of the indifference and\nconfusion of the Gentiles, and that you have put together\nnot the best, but the worst characteristics of them both."