I liked how Michelle said that the Bible shows how men perceived ancient women. This makes me wonder how different the Bible would have been if women wrote it. There would probably be more women in the Bible, but would the stories focus on them instead of men, could they have had more important roles like being prophets? I found it interesting how there was a Women’s Bible created because the Bible pertained more to men and the  relationship between God and men allowed men to have power over women. This would probably allow women to be closer to their religion more. However, I would imagine the backlash from the men could not have been good.

I found it interesting when Redgina said that in Babylonian times the word Yahweh was considered too sacred to say and there were made to forbid it. I think this is weird because they have been using that word for God for hundreds of years and then all of a sudden they can’t say it.  I would understand more if they were taken over by an empire who didn’t believe in Yahweh but that is not the case.  Maybe it is only the Jewish who used the word Yahweh and the people who overtook them have different beliefs.

I thought it was interesting when Mohamad was talking about the Greek period and said that when Alexander went to take over Egypt the people welcomed him instead of fighting him like every other country did. This is a little hard to believe since if someone tried to take over a country today there would be an all out war. I don’t know the history of Egypt in that time but I can only think that things weren’t going well and the people believed Alexander could help.

I found it interesting when Waleska said that as you go back in time the different Bibles were more confusing and various.  I would have thought that the closer they were to the actual event the more accurate and similar they would.  This could have happened because there were different denominations of Judaism and Christianity coming out and they changed the stories a little to fit their beliefs.  I wondered if the copies of the Bible that are similar to each other are actually more accurate historically or are relevant just to the religion they are used in.

I liked how Bernice pointed out that the original manuscripts don’t exist anymore.  This makes it hard to check the facts that are in the Bible today. This also makes it so that translators can add their own beliefs to the Bible because it would be difficult to disprove them without the manuscripts.  Having the translators add their own beliefs allow them to promote their own religion, making it seem as if one way is right and another is wrong.

I found the presentations on Monday interesting.  I liked how Nick mentioned how the Gospels may have been connected but were also different.  I think it’s interesting how the Gospels all tell the story of Christ’s crucifixion but they all have a different twist to the story. This makes me wonder how much is actually fact and how much the author put in for the story to fit his purpose. I’m still a little confused as to the Q thing though.

What really stuck with me about Katie’s presentation was when she said the point was to “teach, not preach”. I liked this because I never really thought about it this way. I always read the Bible as it saying you need to believe in God or you’re doomed.  Looking at it as not preaching but teaching makes it easier to say this is a man talking about his beliefs, almost like philosophy, and once you get the facts of his beliefs you can make your decision from there.

I was absent on friday, but i did the reading. I was confused as to who were the Colossians so I looked it up and found that they were people from the ancient city of Colossae in Southwest Asia Minor. In the Colossians Paul seems to be praising the Colossians for believing in and following Jesus. He wants them all to be certain that they know jesus is God’s son and therefore an extension of Him. If they please Jesus they please God.

Paul also seems to be boasting about himself. He follows Jesus’ gospel and spreads his word. He talks about how he suffers for their sake in order to do this.  He has become a servant to God’s church.

The presentations on Wednesday were great.  I liked Sue’s handout.  I always learn more when I have a visual aid.  It’s interesting to see the comparisons between the Old Testament and the New Testament.  I never realized how much smaller in length and the time period covered in the New Testament is than the Old Testament. The handout also clearly states how God’s word came to his people.

I liked how Shawn mentioned that the Bible molded history to fit its message.  He mentioned how the Bible mentions King David because he followed God’s law. However, the Bible does not mention King Jeroboam II, who had as much wealth and land as David, because he did not follow God’s teaching.  Since Jeroboam II is not in the Bible many people do not know about him, while most know about David. In a way this is using the Bible to say David had such success because he followed God.

I liked how Hannah mentioned that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew while the New Testament was written in ancient Greek.  I already knew this but hearing someone else say it made me think of the different translations.  Sometimes there is not an exact translation for a word so you have to pick the closest or they can have a different meaning in Hebrew and greek than they do in English. This makes me wonder how accurate the translations are  since one word can change the whole meaning of a sentence.

Kia and Mark did a great job today.  I liked how Kia gave the definition of a prophet as someone who listens to god and then interprets His point of view.  This made me question what the apostles in John, Matthew, Luke, Marks, and the Acts are.  They seem to be like prophets because they interpret lessons of God and spread God’s word.  However, I do not think they are prophets because God actually doesn’t speak directly to them like He does with the other prophets.  I don’t know if there is a specific name for them other than the Apostles and they’re just blessed by Christ.  I also liked how Kia tied in Moses as an example of a prophet since I know that story and it gave me a better understanding.

I liked Mark’s presentation on Wisdom literature.  I liked how he used Job as an example because we had already gone over this story I was familiar with it.  With the other stories he mentioned I was a little confused because I am not familiar with them.  I found it interesting that Elihu was not originally in the story of Job but added later.  Elihu was the one character who really made me question what the others believe Job has done wrong because he points out that none of Job’s friends ask what his sin is.  He is also the one to point out that God can do whatever he wants without a reason and is justified in doing it while the friends say Job must have sinned as the reason and Job saying his punishment is justified.

Nicolette talked about how people believed Moses wrote the Pentateuch and was later proven that those stories were really written hundreds of years after Moses death. The stories were pasted down from generation to generation leaving room for details people added instead of just the facts. This makes me wonder how much of the Gospels is true fact and how much was made up to make a better story.
Also with the Gospels being writen at different times I wonder if the authors took material from the stories written before them and how much they added themselves to create a story to fit their message and how the people talked about are perceived. They all agree that Jesus is betrayed by Judas, Jesus is taken by the Jews to Pilate, and he is crucified. However in John it is said that Jesus gives Judas a piece of bread which causes Satan to go into him and he betrays Jesus because of this. In Mark it says that Judas betrayed Jesus for money, making him out to be greedy. I question what is the truth or if both stories hold some truth to them.

I liked how Juanita kept reiterating how the stories in the Bible existed before the Bible actually existed.  I sometimes find this hard to remember because the authors write as if they were actually at the event they are describing.  I found it interesting to learn about the different climates in Israel and how diverse they are for such a small area in Andrew’s presentation.  This made me look differently at when the Jews were traveling to the promised land and how dedicated to that journey they were for enduring the heat.  It also made me see a new cruelty to Jesus’ crucifixion for making him carry the cross up the mountain in extreme heat or in the other versions it’s a punishment for the man they chose to carry the cross.