Alias

Why does the Bible only focus on the Middle East? Why is the rest of the world ignored?

To be a Christian does this mean that Israel is the most important place in the world?

It appears that God is only interested in one specific region. Or that the supposed divine authors of the Bible did not have knowledge of anything outside their geographic location.

Joan of Bark

"For God so loved the world, that he sent his only begotten son -- as well as every other prophet -- to the same tiny area of the near east".

Yes, the Biblical authors knew nothing about the rest of the world -- further evidence that the Bible is not the work of an omniscient God.

Jayrok

Some will say that God chose Israel as the beginning point to bring forth the messiah, or Christ, to launch the gospel to the rest of the world.

But why did it take well over 1000 years for this good news to reach, say, the Americas? While christian factions were arguing and taking sides on various issues in the Roman empire, countless native Americans (north and south) were dying without Jesus.

Since he was the only way the truth and the light and no one could come unto the Father except through him, you'd think he would have squashed the bickering and strategically placed his chosen disciples around the world to make sure all people heard his good news before too many could die without him.

People talk about miracles, but if there was news of "Jesus" and his sacrifice originating out of the Americas or any other part of the world prior to the time christians made it over... that might cause one to think. But what we have is what you'd expect from a man-made religion and its natural progression as word made its way around.

Joan of Bark

You're right on the money, Jayrok. I've been arguing this point for a long time. Why would God use such an inefficient method to transmit his all-important 'word'?

I guess this was his thinking ...

Chadley Krakka

Let's see how the devil's advocate replies:

That is WHY the gospel is so important! That is WHY God/Jesus tells us in the gospels that we are to make disciples of all nations.

The important thing is not whether others have heard the gospel, the important issue is that now you heard the gospel but you rejected it. Your will be judged far more worse than those cavemen and bushmen and tribesmen. As for me I'm glad I've heard the gospel and is assured of peace in everlasting heaven.

Jayrok

Did Jesus know that there were other nations outside the Roman empire? I seem to remember him telling his disciples to go spread the good news to all the towns in Israel. He told them not to go to the Gentiles, but to the Israelites. If fact, he said his disciples wouldn't finish going through the towns of Israel before he returned in his glory. Not sure what happened there.

Did Jesus know that most of the Israelites would not believe his disciples and that it would eventually require a Roman, or Jew depending on the audience he was speaking to, to finally make progress in spreading his good news... mostly through the Gentiles of the empire?

And which version of the good news did you hear and believe? Is circumcision really not such a big deal to God? Did Jesus say or teach this? Or is this just what the Roman/Jew said to his gentile audience who didn't want to hear anything about cutting their privates? It seems odd that Jesus would teach this, especially in light of scripture like Ezekiel 44:9.

So what really is the gospel? What does Jesus really want us to know? And why does he rely on fallible men to speak for him when he could just as easily visit each and every one of us to give us comfort and assurance that he's real?

John Kesler

You may want to see my post here, which touches on this topic. Also, the "table of nations" in Genesis 10 is clearly intended to show that all "70" of the world's nations--an idea which goes back to Canaanite mythology and is related to Deuteronomy 32:8-9 being discussed in another thread--derived from Noah's sons, again showing no awareness of the existence of peoples in North and South America, Australia, etc.

Chili

Christianity should never be a religion because it is the end of Judasim for OT people and end of Catholicism for NT people . . . wherefore Catholics are not Christians in the same way that Jews are not Christians until they become Christians and then they are no longer Catholic or Jew.

Notice how Jesus never entered the temple again except the precinct from where he raised hell with the parisees for misleading him.

Alias

The answer I usually get from Christians regarding the ignornant heathens in the New World is that they would probably be given a "special place in heaven". I'm guessing that "special place" is being servants to Christians.

Alias

Yes. Even if we accept that the omniscient God chose Israel as a starting point for his message and didn't care that it would take about 2,000 years to expand the entire populace of the planet, it still does not excuse the total ignorance of the rest of the world that is evident in the Bible.

I actually think this point is not brought up enough by skeptics. As a young Christian it was one of the first serious doubts planted in the back of my mind.