New Post
Search
HelpThey were names before the Bible came along. nt
in reply to a message by Laslow
nt
Sometimes sentences don't end the way you think they salad.
Sometimes sentences don't end the way you think they salad.
This message was edited 9/23/2016, 12:52 PM
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Definitely true. I tend to think of the Bible as a semi-historical document full of stories people made up or changed to teach lessons to their followers and was rewritten many times through history to suit what Christian spiritual leaders felt the current generation's beliefs and needs should be.
The names in the Bible are just the names that were popular among people at the time or maybe just popular with Christian's at the time. There are also names that they chose to portray in a negative light by giving them to people of "poor" character or they belonged to people of "poor" character. They may have also made up some of the names in the Bible I would assume they did but maybe not.
I've heard until recently most Christian's used to not consider the Bible to be literal but rather a teaching tool full of metaphor. The number of people who view the Bible to be the literal word of God has been growing in number. I would find it difficult to view it as a completely historical document since we can trace the history of the Bible and it has been changed many times and parts of it have been removed. The question always becomes what exactly was changed. I know that some of the names have definitely changed through time and translation.
-------------
The names in the Bible are just the names that were popular among people at the time or maybe just popular with Christian's at the time. There are also names that they chose to portray in a negative light by giving them to people of "poor" character or they belonged to people of "poor" character. They may have also made up some of the names in the Bible I would assume they did but maybe not.
I've heard until recently most Christian's used to not consider the Bible to be literal but rather a teaching tool full of metaphor. The number of people who view the Bible to be the literal word of God has been growing in number. I would find it difficult to view it as a completely historical document since we can trace the history of the Bible and it has been changed many times and parts of it have been removed. The question always becomes what exactly was changed. I know that some of the names have definitely changed through time and translation.
-------------
This message was edited 9/23/2016, 2:16 PM
1
I didn't know there were people who viewed the Bible to be literal. But even then, the people in the Bible would have been named whatever they were named before the Bible existed. Their parents gave them the names they did for some reason. None of the major Biblical names could have existed without the Hebrew language existing first, which couldn't have existed without its predecessors, etc.
1
Yep and there are a lot of people especially in the US who take the Bible to be literal. The number supposedly keeps growing. Through history there have been generations where literal believers of the Bible were the majority and generations where the majority felt the Bible was more about metaphor. We are currently in a time where the majority of Christian's in the US believe the Bible to be literal.
Most Catholics I know view the Bible to be metaphorical and most of the Christian's I'm close to are Catholics. Though I know more people who believe in God but are not Christian's, Jew's, or Muslims. Some of them actively dislike organized religion but some of them just don't find it necessary. The PNW has a lot of people who are not apart of an organized religion.
-----------
Most Catholics I know view the Bible to be metaphorical and most of the Christian's I'm close to are Catholics. Though I know more people who believe in God but are not Christian's, Jew's, or Muslims. Some of them actively dislike organized religion but some of them just don't find it necessary. The PNW has a lot of people who are not apart of an organized religion.
-----------
This message was edited 9/24/2016, 4:42 AM
1
I don't want an argument, just to give you information if you wish to read it.
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-no4-2016-july/bible-changed-or-tampered/#?insight[search_id]=538803df-a087-47de-a556-13db90d4ce93&insight[search_result_index]=13
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-no4-2016-july/bible-changed-or-tampered/#?insight[search_id]=538803df-a087-47de-a556-13db90d4ce93&insight[search_result_index]=13
1
Um, not a very unbiased source there.
1
What?!
Obviously some of them were but we only have them recorded at all because of the Bible.
Obviously some of them were but we only have them recorded at all because of the Bible.
This message was edited 9/24/2016, 2:50 AM
1
Well, all names in the Bible were names before the Bible was written. They weren't made up for the sake of writing the Bible. Yes, we know of them because they are recorded there but technically they pretty much existed without correlation to the Bible to begin with.
1
Still, Adam was the first "Adam", Eve the first "Eve", same with Abel, Cain and Enoch.
1
Were they? We don't know.
1
It depends on your faith, I guess. I have full faith that they were.
1
The names themselves probably just developed naturally from language the way most names do. If nobody had recorded any of the stuff in the Bible, those names would still have been passed on through language and because people like to name their kids after relatives or ancestors (even if the Biblical people were the first people to ever have those names).
But it's not like they just decided to name their babies some gibberish sound that then became a name. They had root words from the language and sound structures that identified them as "namey".
But it's not like they just decided to name their babies some gibberish sound that then became a name. They had root words from the language and sound structures that identified them as "namey".
1
Yes and lets not forget that all of the Old Testament names are Jewish and many of those names are common to Islamic naming traditions as well!
1
I reckon more names have probably survived and more are widely known in the western world due to the Bible but you're right =)
Unfortunately, we get a lot of gibberish names today. I just saw a BA of Jonal *sigh*.
Unfortunately, we get a lot of gibberish names today. I just saw a BA of Jonal *sigh*.
1
We obviously have different views of what the Bible is. I respect your belief, I don't want to turn this discussion into some big religious argument. I just see it differently than you.
1
That's fine. I respect all beliefs but especially appreciate when people are informed, whatever their conclusions about the information may =)
1