The Bible. Myth or Reality?

Post Reply New Topic

The Bible. Myth or Reality?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAEpc1zhcuo

As a Gnostic Christian I see literal reading of the Bible as a gross distortion of what the Bible was written to do. That being to inspire people to seek God and his best laws and rules. Literal readers just become idol worshipers and do not seek God the way Jesus instructed.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html

Literal reading has created and idol worshiping closed minded people who have settled for an immoral God whom we name as a demiurge as his morals, if literally true, are more satanic than God like.

Literal reading has also created a climate where scholars and experts, historians and archeologist, and all the academically well accepted information they uncover, --- is being ignored or called lies by those who are not academics of the various disciplines.

What is the point of producing good academics if literalists are going to ignore facts because of blind faith?

Remember please that if not a book of myths, then real talking serpents are somehow supposed to still exist and believers have to believe in a lot of supernatural phenomenon without any evidence whatsoever. Literalist Christians, it seems to me, have suspended rational judgement that has created in Christians a new Dark Age of thought and an Inquisitional attitude towards all other thinking. They no longer seek God and are true idol worshipers instead of the God seekers that Jesus wanted to see.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvBxFXQy7-M


Do you think the Bible to be a book of myths or a book trying to show reality and history?

Regards
DL

If you can find other evidence outside the Holy Texts that back up what happened, then, chances are, it happened but if what is in the Holy Text is the only reference events are dubious at best and this goes for any historical document. The One Shot is often disputed and taken with a grain of salt while the Many Shots are more likely to be regarded to have occurred, so long as they are not just copies of one another but separate witnesses that reach similar or same conclusions without reading one another. Those are the best sources for info. So if you can find Many Shots that record the same conclusion that aren't related to one another, there's your bingo.

This goes for everything the Bible references, including its heroes, heroines, historical figures and events. Look for evidence elsewhere that hasn't been merely copied from existing sources and it's likely the event happened. Look for multiple unrelated sources describing a historical figure, chances are they existed.

Some of The Holy Texts could be true, some of them false.

I believe strongly in the Enlightenment of The Christos which activates our abilities to heal, serve, be graceful, merciful, compassionate and kind. Gnostics in antiquity sought out such qualities in themselves and others. Many were healers. All sought their inner spark which was part of Sophia and would lead to enlightenment, liberation and salvation.

I agree, wisdom cannot be thoroughly accessed by means of written word alone. It must be inward as well, where the spark lies.

So to look within the pages of a book for wisdom and believing if a formula is strictly adhered to, wisdom will be the only outcome...I do not agree with this. Books are a manifest of The Demiurge and cannot be completely trusted at all times. They can negate the spark within and harm the spirit.

Was the Bible journalism?

Is it now literal history?

Any book that has talking snakes, the Sun standing still in the sky, dudes living to be 900 years old, virgin births, a dude residing in the belly of a whale, folks rising from the dead, and a flood that drowned mount Everest, is probably NOT even meant to be taken literally.

Was it meant to be taken as a story that contains truths rather than as a true story?

I think that that is a safe bet.

I used to be a "Gnostic-Christian" before I put "Question Everything" into active-practice.
The bible is just like any other "ancient" document, FULL of half-truths and partial-truths, perhaps you could even say "incomplete" truths and yes, believe it or not, even out-right lies & fabrications.

Consider this: History repeats itself, people repeat history, history is repeated.
A time in history came when "Jesus" came into existence. Why ? One of those reasons was to correct the erroneous beliefs of the ancient Jewish-culture. A "New Testament" came into existence. Why ? Due to "changes" that had to be "updated" due to various teachings of the OT being obsolete ? Also, when Jesus taught things during his ministries, some things may be contradictary. One of those reasons is that, yes, due to growing up in a culture where "established beliefs" were already set in place and already in existence before he was even born, that he certainly would have taught some of those false-beliefs during the earlier parts of his life during his ministries, but later on he realised that those beliefs were full of bullocks, and thus he went against the "establishment" (like the Pharisees) of the day which made them hate him for "promoting blasphemy" (equivalent emotional-effect to "promoting woo-woo") against their belief-system.

Now let's say that history repeats itself again and that the New Testament had to be updated due to changes. What would the next volume be called & by whom would it be written ? I suspect that it would be called something like the Truth Testament and its author would be someone with a very Yoda-style of speech (such as from Star-Wars) perhaps even the very reincarnation of the Jesus-personality himself in the disguise of a simple man (for the purpose of "testing" humanity's ability to "humble" themselves or to see if they're of the "arrogant" type who insists that they only want to listen to kings & people of "social-status" importance).

I think Marcion's reaction to the difference between the character of Old and New Testament was pretty normal to a lot of people, particularly if they read the text through from front to back full ride.

I tend to think the best case made was that the Torah and other similar books were pieced together at the end of the Babylonian captivity - Cyrus the Great and Ezra often get thrown out there as the most likely suspects. What's insane about these texts though, aside from their eclectic sampling of Babylonian, Egyptian, and Zoroastrian thought, is the depth of mystic import and the degree of the gematria employed (ie. number and word-play hinting at various different 'zipped' layers). On one hand you can see there being cultural propaganda, mainly the Zoroastrian monotheistic fingerprint and the backward engineering of Israelite history, but it seems like there's too much there for it to just be a propaganda piece. If it were thrown together to be a national narrative for an Israel going back home it seems like whoever stitched all of this together had an intimate understanding of both the local mystery traditions in the region and also a good understanding, used lavishly, of how the mysteries coded their documents as the OT was extensively coded for multi-tiered reading.