Christian Bible - nothing but the truth ? [Archive]

View Full Version : Christian Bible - nothing but the truth ?

Pr⊕phet

22-02-2007, 01:28 PM

fivelza

22-02-2007, 01:39 PM

... do you take it as a guide line or black and white rules ?

My first response is that as a Christian I accept the Bible as it is which is the Word of God.

As to your question regarding rules or guidelines, there are very clear rules in the Bible regarding certain things.

The Cosmos

22-02-2007, 01:44 PM

Pr⊕phet

22-02-2007, 01:45 PM

not to sound stupid,
but if the bible (the book itself) is the word of God then what is the 'word of God' then ?

please elaborate on that.
...

so all the rules in the bible including the OT and the NT (i gues) is the cleary
what one could call God's law into us for most or everything in life ?

The Cosmos

22-02-2007, 01:46 PM

The Word of the Almighty is Christ. The Bible is referred to in the Bible as the scriptures.

Pr⊕phet

22-02-2007, 01:47 PM

@ Internet Junkie
'The Ferrar Fenton' is then a complete translate of the bible as we have it to day ?

and can the public or have access to the original scripts where the first translation was made from ?

... not to mention i should start learning greek and hebrew ;)

The Cosmos

22-02-2007, 01:49 PM

This is my opinion. The Ferrar Fenton is the best translation of the bible i have found.

and can the public or have access to the original scripts where the first translation was made from ?

Museums have usually that sort of thing, but google the texts and you should find plenty.

Encyclopedias should also have plenty of info, not to mention, any libraries.

Pr⊕phet

22-02-2007, 01:51 PM

...ill go and look then at The Ferrar Fenton version.

thanx

Natas

22-02-2007, 02:44 PM

garyb01

24-02-2007, 12:33 PM

Pr⊕phet

24-02-2007, 11:27 PM

Pr⊕phet

24-02-2007, 11:29 PM

garyb01. how much of the gnostics texts have you read ?

garyb01

25-02-2007, 01:27 AM

garyb01. how much of the gnostics texts have you read ?

Honestly, not as many as I would have liked too, quite a few but mostly The Gospel according to Judas, which is purported to be one. I have studied this one quite intently and to be honest, if it is true, it answers a lot of questions that have lingered in my mind and have puzzled me about God, creation and the vast differences depicted between the old and new testaments of the bible.

I have read through a few translations of some of the gnostic gospels and most of them have the same general message, that God is inside of us, and that we are all part of a much larger spiritual plan and dynasty.

Personally, and this is a very subjective opinion based upon my own "hobby" type research, I do not believe that the Bible as we read it today contains all the truths about Christianity or contains an accurate historical record of ALL events of the time but an only accurate record of the events that it was decided should be included in the bible. I believe and there is proof of this, that what we have today is a very watered down version, compiled by means of a process of selection by men who made decisions as to what should or should not be included in the writings to be followed by the church. Once man puts his grubby little paws onto something I tend to view it with skepticism, especially knowing that so many gospels or accounts of the time of Jesus, were purposefully left out!

With all the facts that I personally have at hand, my personal opinion is that the bible as it stands today is the word of God, but only part of that word. Man played editor in Chief or Moderator and left out the bits that did not fit in with the times.

For example, The Gospel of Judas was well known about and referred to in Church writings, yet left out, as was the Gospel of Mary, as was the fact that at the same time of Jesus there were other men performing miracles and claiming to be the Son of God.

I think that there is a heck of a lot that we don't know and a lot that we were purposefully misguided on, centuries ago. The Gnostic gospels paint a completely different picture of the "baddies" referred to in the Bible and of the God that we have come to know about in the Bible that we read today.

Whether you believe what is contained in the Bible today or not, google the Gnostic Gospels and texts, read what they contain and say and open your mind up to other possibilities. Maybe you will draw the same conclusion that what we have today is maybe just a part of a larger picture.

Neo

25-02-2007, 10:35 AM

If you feel like a bit of reading, get a copy of "The Lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden". It contains a fair number of the Apocryphal books from Adam right up to Jesus, including a number of epistles.

It was first printed in 1926 but I'm sure you'll still find it in print. My copy is about 20 years old.

FlyingPika

25-02-2007, 12:06 PM

while looking at the various of translations i see that god have made more than one man and woman or did he ?

according to the bible man and woman was made in

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

and then another man was made in

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

and another woman in

Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

:confused:

WHAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaa
Im trying to be long suffering but im just a human ^_^!!!
Ok lots of people ask about this, over and over and over
and over
and over
and over
and over again. It just proves that they havent read the whole of genesis.

CHAPTER 1 tells the entire story in the order that it happened.
Genesis 2:4-6 gives a quick summary of the first 5 days of creation.
Genesis 2:7-25 is describing only the the events that took place on the day six in the Garden of Eden.

If in any other book you read it gave an overview, then went back and gave more detail on certain parts you wouldnt be confused. ITs so clear, but ppl luv to point this out with out even checking it up for themselves.

FlyingPika

25-02-2007, 12:39 PM

if you are a christian do you:

believe in the bible as being 100% correct ?
that the bible is 100% truthfull ?
in the bible as a whole including all its parts ?
or that all the books in it should be there and behold as the ultimate truth ?

which parts are to be believe of some are not ?
or how does one decide wheter is fictional, mythological, literal or symbolic intepretation ?

which should one follow the words in the book, teachings of g0d and or jezus, or try to aspire to the way that jezus lived ?

... do you take it as a guide line or black and white rules ?

Alot of people who know there is a God, but dont like the nature of the Him, so they adapt the bible to better suite their lifestyle or needs. This is Idolatry is whether it be with your hands or with your mind.

Believing that some of the bible is true, is a slippery slope. Then which portions are true and which aren’t? Its convenient to believe the parts about Gods blessings, God’s Love, but then to ignore the part where He says “If you Love me you will obey me”. Or to ignore His judgements and make him out to be a hippie with daffodils in His Hair, instead of the righteous Judge. God is kinda like the Dad that goes to work, deals with the world (Read about the return of Jesus in Revelations), and then when hes home he can be kind/lving/gentle with his family:

Matt. 23:37-38 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!

I believe the whole bible, whether it be the flood where Noah got into the boat and waited for 7 days (before it started raining) while the people laughed their asses off at him.
I also believe the Jonah and the whale, Job and his persecution, and the creation as described by Genesis. Nothing is impossible with God.

"All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3: 16-17.)

What this scripture means by “God breathed” is that the Holy spirit guided the people from Kings to sheppards about what to write.

I used to read the new message because it was so easy, but when I compared it to the KJV I couldnt even find similar passages, and this worried me. I know read the amplified which is as close as to the original language you will get without having to learn Greek etc.

How can you know a book is from God, being written outside of time is a good indication. All those prophecies about Jesus all came true. And in the New testament theres a whole lot more, for example Israel being reborn, and judgement day etc. Read Revalations its a good read if you believe or not.

I just wish people would read it before judging it. A lot of people hate the bible and have never read it. If you have read the bible and still hate it I have a lot more respect for you looking into it.

nthdimension

25-02-2007, 01:00 PM

But can you find anyone who actually follows the entire Bible to the letter?

PostmanPot

25-02-2007, 01:01 PM

Alot of people who know there is a God, but dont like the nature of the Him, so they adapt the bible to better suite their lifestyle or needs. This is Idolatry is whether it be with your hands or with your mind.

So what about Jews? They "know there is a God" and they are the 'originals' and the 'chosen ones'. Why was the Bible adapted to suit Christian needs? If Christians' idea of God is based on the Bible, then in a Jew's opinion they are not praying to God... Racist but it is in accordance with what you say about only accepting certain parts of the Bible!

My Jewish girl friend says this:

"The way I see it (and in very simple terms) - there is only one G-d the G-d of the Jews and He created all people - Jews and non Jews, however, the other monotheist religons have a different perception of what G-d is, therefore beleive in something other than G-d."

Neo

25-02-2007, 01:02 PM

All those prophecies about Jesus all came true. And in the New testament theres a whole lot more, for example Israel being reborn, and judgement day etc. Read Revalations its a good read if you believe or not.

Which prophecies would these be?

garyb01

25-02-2007, 06:49 PM

Alot of people who know there is a God, but dont like the nature of the Him, so they adapt the bible to better suite their lifestyle or needs. This is Idolatry is whether it be with your hands or with your mind.

Believing that some of the bible is true, is a slippery slope. Then which portions are true and which aren’t? Its convenient to believe the parts about Gods blessings, God’s Love, but then to ignore the part where He says “If you Love me you will obey me”. Or to ignore His judgements and make him out to be a hippie with daffodils in His Hair, instead of the righteous Judge. God is kinda like the Dad that goes to work, deals with the world (Read about the return of Jesus in Revelations), and then when hes home he can be kind/lving/gentle with his family:

I believe the whole bible, whether it be the flood where Noah got into the boat and waited for 7 days (before it started raining) while the people laughed their asses off at him.
I also believe the Jonah and the whale, Job and his persecution, and the creation as described by Genesis. Nothing is impossible with God.

What this scripture means by “God breathed” is that the Holy spirit guided the people from Kings to sheppards about what to write.

I used to read the new message because it was so easy, but when I compared it to the KJV I couldnt even find similar passages, and this worried me. I know read the amplified which is as close as to the original language you will get without having to learn Greek etc.

How can you know a book is from God, being written outside of time is a good indication. All those prophecies about Jesus all came true. And in the New testament theres a whole lot more, for example Israel being reborn, and judgement day etc. Read Revalations its a good read if you believe or not.

I just wish people would read it before judging it. A lot of people hate the bible and have never read it. If you have read the bible and still hate it I have a lot more respect for you looking into it.

You certainly sound like someone who knows the bible quite well as per your quote:

"I believe the whole bible, whether it be the flood where Noah got into the boat and waited for 7 days (before it started raining) while the people laughed their asses off at him.
I also believe the Jonah and the whale, Job and his persecution, and the creation as described by Genesis. Nothing is impossible with God".

Please do not see this post as a attack on you or your beliefs at all. I am merely trying to pose the question about blind belief in the Bible and to attempt to elicit a thought process as to the question posed by this thread, i.e. is the bible the whole truth, or does it indeed contain all the "truths" out there?

Yet, can you explain why the bible itself is viewed by so many scholars to be the book with the most contradictory messages in it, to ever be written. We go from the almost complete destruction of Mankind during the great floods described in Genesis, The destruction of Sodom and Gamora, The wiping out of the enemies of Israel to John 3 v16??? The eye for an eye to turn the other cheek??

Once again I reiterate what i said above. I have no doubt that from a historical record perspective, what is contained in the bible and the history that it depicts, is indeed correct. I just don't and cant believe that everything that should be in there, actually is. Man decided what gospels will and wont be included in the Bible during the early days of the church and this alone, makes me view the makeup of the Bible as we have it today, with suspicion.

"I just wish people would read it before judging it. A lot of people hate the bible and have never read it. If you have read the bible and still hate it I have a lot more respect for you looking into it"

Well let me put it to you this way, I have read it, over and over, i have studied it, over and over and if we follow the thought pattern that has been indicated here, then I should be struck down for typing this on a Sunday or any day believed to be the Sabbath. It is not a case of hating the Bible, its a case of refusing to blindly believe something that was influenced by man, which writings man decided will it will include or not, and which is so completely contradictory to itself.

"Believing that some of the bible is true, is a slippery slope. Then which portions are true and which aren’t?"

I think that that statement of yours is the crux of this entire thread and I am guessing that by stating this you are saying that we cannot judge which portions are true and which are not and for this reason we should believe everything that is contained in it? If someone murders a member of my family, the Bible gives me the right to both seek revenge in an eye for an eye, but simultaneously turn the other cheek and provide this person with forgiveness. I am of course paraphrasing but I think that I am getting the idea across.

To my mind, blind belief of the Bible and its contents is the easy way out. We were given creative and questioning minds, the ability to pose questions and seek answers, for a very good reason. Its easier to blindly accept than to challenge, question and ponder. If I, or any other human being were meant to blindly follow the contents of the bible, we would not have been given the ability to question its very contents. This does not affect or diminish faith in the creator, or the building of a spiritual relationship with the creator.

But I digress, so if by your assertion, the entire contents of the Bible are completely true, and we as humans should, as a demonstration of our faith completely believe every aspect thereof , then can you explain Genesis Chap 6 Vs 1-4 KJV, concerning the Nephilim, and how these were giants, Sons of God who roamed the earth and had children with the daughters of Man, The hero's of old, Men of renown. And then explain why every culture, Greek, Roman, Inca, Azteck, Egyptian, Red Indian etc etc has tales and folk law about different gods and deities? Many other books and ancient scripts describe this aspect of human life and how it was the time of the Nephilim and what mankind learned during this time, that led to the evil that was to be eradicated by the floods. However, the Bible only contains about 7 versus in reference to this in two books that I have found. It is for this reason that I am making the hypothesis that we cannot believe that the Bible that we have today, contains everything that it should, and cannot because of these exclusions, be said to be the entire truth.

garyb01

25-02-2007, 06:52 PM

ghoti

25-02-2007, 06:53 PM

The bible is the biggest best seller of all time..even bigger than the davinci code, which is a book based on another book, and therfore the movie is a movie based on a book based on a book.....I wish I had written the bible..then i could liive off the royalties for the rest of my life.

Pity its never made any of Amazon.com`s top selling lists. Ever. If the Bible is Gods word, then he has a thing about men who have lost their penis`s from entering a Church.... if that is Gods word... then God is not all I thought it could be. Never pictured something as great as God being a sexist and a homophobe. Wow... how limited and human!

Just to remind you about the great word of "God" :

Deut 25:11-12

11 If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, 12you shall cut off her hand; show no pity.

and

Deut 23:1-2

23No one whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off shall be admitted to the assembly of the Lord.

Im sorry, if thats the "word of God", then "God" is absurd.

noxibox

26-02-2007, 10:16 AM

Once again I reiterate what i said above. I have no doubt that from a historical record perspective, what is contained in the bible and the history that it depicts, is indeed correct.
That's not really the case. Not only does the Bible contradict itself on historical events, but it does not tally with other historical records.

Pr⊕phet

26-02-2007, 01:45 PM

WHAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaa
Im trying to be long suffering but im just a human ^_^!!!
Ok lots of people ask about this, over and over and over
and over
and over
and over
and over again. It just proves that they havent read the whole of genesis.

CHAPTER 1 tells the entire story in the order that it happened.
Genesis 2:4-6 gives a quick summary of the first 5 days of creation.
Genesis 2:7-25 is describing only the the events that took place on the day six in the Garden of Eden.

If in any other book you read it gave an overview, then went back and gave more detail on certain parts you wouldnt be confused. ITs so clear, but ppl luv to point this out with out even checking it up for themselves.

i must have missed the print which seperate the 'overview' and the 'explination'

...where did the other people then came from that adam/eve mated with. or did they keep it in the family ?? :confused:

PostmanPot

26-02-2007, 02:14 PM

CHAPTER 1 tells the entire story in the order that it happened.
Genesis 2:4-6 gives a quick summary of the first 5 days of creation.
Genesis 2:7-25 is describing only the the events that took place on the day six in the Garden of Eden.

It's funny that your opinion differs to that of other Biblical scholars. Many believe that there were actualy two authors for Genesis... Yes, Biblical scholars.

garyb01

26-02-2007, 10:51 PM

The Following is an excerpt from one of the gospels that were deemed to be excluded from the "BIBLE" as we have it today by the Council of Laodicea, when the various canons of the Church were issue, including which "gospels" should be included from both the old and the new testament. Many, many written works, long deemed as scripture, wittten by "prophets" of God, such as the Book of Enoch, who according to the bible was so righteous that he never died but was taken directly to heaven by God.

And Jesus answered: "Seek not the law in your scriptures, for the law is life, whereas the scripture is dead. I tell you truly, Moses received not his laws from God in writing, but through the living word. The law is living word of living God to living prophets for living men. In everything that is life is the law written. You find it in the grass, in the tree, in the river, in the mountain, in the birds of heaven, in the fishes of the sea; but seek it chiefly in yourselves. For I tell you truly, all living things are nearer to God than the scripture which is without life. God so made life and all living things that they might by the everlasting word teach the laws of the true God to man. God wrote not the laws in the pages of books, but in your heart and in your spirit. They are in your breath, your blood, your bone; in your flesh, your bowels, your eyes, your ears, and in every little part of your body. They are present in the air, in the water, in the earth, in the plants, in th e sunbeams, in the depths and in the heights. They all speak to you that you may understand the tongue and the will of the living God. But you shut your eyes that you may not see, and you shut your ears that you may not hear. I tell you truly, that the scripture is the work of man, but life and all its hosts are the work of our God. Wherefore do you not listen to the words of God which are written in His works? And wherefore do you study the dead scriptures which are the work of the hands of men?"

One can see why the early Church would have wanted to exclude this "gospel"!

THE COUNCIL OF LAODICEA IN PHRYGIA PACATIANA 364 A.D.

There was an important historical event, back in the 4th century. It is called the Council of Laodicea. It changed history two significant ways. At this council they determined what would and would not be considered canon. They decided what would and would not be included in the Bible or read at church. (Canon #60.)

It gets interesting when you consider the second implication of what was published. They published, in total, 60 cannons at this council, thus codifying church doctrine. During the 2nd and 3rd centuries, Christians were in the habit of keeping both Saturday and Sunday. In fact Ethiopian Christians still do today. During that time, Christians rested on the Sabbath (in the Lord) and had communion or fellowship on Sundays. The Church fathers at the Council of Laodicea were not opposed to Sunday services but were opposed to Christians Judaizing the Sabbath (see 29th Canon), Judaizing is what they labled Christians resting on the Sabbath day. At the Council of Laodicea, they published as doctrine that the practice of staying at home and resting on the Sabbath was sinful and anathema to Christ.

If you read The Epistle of Barnabus, Chapter 13, you will see why in light of the 29th Canon they had to ban the text from the New Testament. There are sources today that quote the Epistle of Barnabus to justify going to Church on Sunday, but they completely miss the fact the text explains why one shouldn't trust going to a building made of hands as part of Sabbath worship. That is not how to obey God and keep the Sabbath. (Lev 23:3, Sabbath is to be kept in one's dwelling) The Church Fathers couldn't ban Sabbath keeping and then allow a text to become canon that admonishes Christians on the proper way to keep the Sabbath!"

CANON XXIX.

CHRISTIANS must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

CANON LX.

THESE are all the books of Old Testament appointed to be read: 1, Genesis of the world; 2, The Exodus from Egypt; 3, Leviticus; 4, Numbers; 5, Deuteronomy; 6, Joshua, the son of Nun; 7, Judges, Ruth; 8, Esther; 9, Of the Kings, First and Second; 10, Of the Kings, Third and Fourth; 11, Chronicles, First and Second; 12, Esdras, First and Second; 13, The Book of Psalms; 14, The Proverbs of Solomon; 15, Ecclesiastes; 16, The Song of Songs;17, Job; 18, The Twelve Prophets; 19, Isaiah; 20, Jeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle; 21, Ezekiel; 22, Daniel.

And these are the books of the New Testament: Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; The Acts of the Apostles; Seven Catholic Epistles, to wit, one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude; Fourteen Epistles of Paul, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon.

Books banned by the Council of Laodicea
Barnabas
I Clement
II Clement
Christ and Abgarus
The Apostles' Creed
I Hermas-Visions
II Hermas-Commands
III Hermas-Similitudes
Ephesians
I Infancy
II Infancy
Mary
Magnesians
Nicodemus
Paul and Seneca
Paul and Thecla
Philippians
Philadelphians
Polycarp
Romans
Trallians
Letters of Herod and Pilate
The First Book of Adam and Eve
The Second Book of Adam and Eve
The Secrets of Enoch
The Psalms of Solomon
The Odes of Solomon
The Fourth Book of Maccabees
The Story of Ahikar
The Testament of Reuben
Asher
Joseph
Simeon
Levi
Judah
Issachar
Zebulum
Dan
Naphtali
Gad
Benjamin

This is the last that I will say on this topic because I can go on for hours about what is commonly referred to in many scholastic and religious circles as the "Biblical Corruption" that occurred at this council.

This thread is titled: The Christian Bible, the whole truth ? or something in that line and poses the question.

My reply to that is simple: No, I do not believe it to be the whole truth.

I would like to end this post off with a excerpt from the following article:

HAS THE BIBLE BEEN FAITHFULLY PRESERVED?
By Allan Cronshaw
Modern day Christian doctrine rests upon the premise that God preserved the Bible in an absolute infallible and pure state, in order that all men should know the (historical) truth and believe in the Son of God. Their doctrinal position is that if God permitted the Bible to have been altered, then the present day church could not be genuine. Based upon this dogmatic presumption that the Christian Church must be maintained in order for man to be saved, they reason that God would not allow the written word of the scriptures to be corrupted. Thus, modern Christians cling to this doctrine -- ignoring overwhelming evidence to the contrary -- evidence that demonstrates conclusively that our Bible has been severely altered and edited -- because they fail to grasp the very foundational principles of the New Covenant itself -- principles that are not historical, but spiritual. It is not until we understand that the Bible is a road-map that leads us to the Gate of the Kingdom, and the Word that is written in our hearts -- rather than a final revelation from God to man -- that we are able to even begin to come to terms with the Spiritual Gospel of Christ that can never be corrupted.

The very assertion of Christian Church Authority that either the Church or the scriptures must be preserved in order for man to obtain salvation not only demonstrates a total inability to perceive the essence of the Gospel message -- but perhaps more importantly, has already been historically disproven and demonstrated to be in error. Once the Church was adopted by Rome in the fourth century, it became unlawful for the scriptures to be given into the hands of the common believer -- thus, throughout most of Christian history the written text of the scriptures was not available to the people.

EDITED DUE TO TOO MANY CHARACTERS!

The Cosmos

02-03-2007, 11:01 PM

i must have missed the print which seperate the 'overview' and the 'explination'

...where did the other people then came from that adam/eve mated with. or did they keep it in the family ?? :confused:

The verses you quoted tell the same story. If you goto a bible which has cross references running down each page, you will see Gen 1.26 and Gen 2:7 cross reference each other.

ghoti

02-03-2007, 11:18 PM

My first response is that as a Christian I accept the Bible as it is which is the Word of God.

As to your question regarding rules or guidelines, there are very clear rules in the Bible regarding certain things.

Once again, I present to you the "Word of [-]man[/-] God":

Deut 25:11-12

11 If men get into a fight with one another, and the wife of one intervenes to rescue her husband from the grip of his opponent by reaching out and seizing his genitals, 12you shall cut off her hand; show no pity.

Why would God put that into his word?

The Cosmos

02-03-2007, 11:23 PM

It's puzzling, but one explanation i can offer, is that in the old time if you caused harm in this case, but not enough to warrant death, then your punishment was this. Maybe it depended on the type of harm caused.

Pr⊕phet

04-03-2007, 09:50 AM

The First Book of Adam and Eve
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/freebook/adameve/adamevetoc.html

The Second Book
of Adam and Eve
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/freebook/adameve2/adameve2-toc.html
...

garyb01, got any links for the other ones ?

Mr TB

04-03-2007, 10:59 AM

Once again, I present to you the "Word of [-]man[/-] God":

Why would God put that into his word?

Maybe we should counter this with a question. Why are only 5 murders committed in a country where the death penalty is still in place?

Second question , how does the penalty relate to penalties given for such actions where god were not followed in ancient regimes such as egypt etc.
The penalties given in liberated countries such as Iraq and Iran for theft only can be a starting point... god is not served in that countries...

But of course the easy way out is... "not relevant"

ToxicBunny

04-03-2007, 11:44 AM

5 murders???? which country is this? The vatican?

nthdimension

04-03-2007, 12:53 PM

What are we supposed to take from that semi-coherent rambling?

Neo

04-03-2007, 02:01 PM

What are we supposed to take from that semi-coherent rambling?

The standard dodo tactic; "I made a silly statement I can't defend, so I'll try and change the topic and hope no-one notice."

Mr TB

04-03-2007, 02:21 PM

IN RESPONSE TO NTDIMENSION

Semi-incoherent ramblings:

The death penalty is applicable murdering a person in Singapoer, a jail sentence of 25 years is applicable in SA.

In ancient Israel cutting of a woman's hand was applicable if her husband is in a brawl and she interferes grabbing
the other man by the testicals.
What was the penalty applicable to a woman in similar circumstances in the ancient world excluding israel.
Was is burning on the stake, gang rape? The penalty ensure woman will not interfere in brawls it is clear as daylight!

The severe punishments were to ensure the safety of the women, you have to admit it...
What can you take from this? The punishments for the deeds make sense thinking about them along the correct lines.

I can also add further explanation in relation to the holiness of god but that will only complicate the scene...

FlyingPika

04-03-2007, 03:22 PM

So what about Jews? They "know there is a God" and they are the 'originals' and the 'chosen ones'. Why was the Bible adapted to suit Christian needs? If Christians' idea of God is based on the Bible, then in a Jew's opinion they are not praying to God... Racist but it is in accordance with what you say about only accepting certain parts of the Bible!

My Jewish girl friend says this:

"The way I see it (and in very simple terms) - there is only one G-d the G-d of the Jews and He created all people - Jews and non Jews, however, the other monotheist religons have a different perception of what G-d is, therefore beleive in something other than G-d."

Please ask your friend to read her old testiment:
(Here are some i noted in my bible)
Psalms 22 & 41:9
Isaiah 53:3 & 7:14 & 29:18 & 50:6 & 53:12
Zechariah 11:12-13
Hebrews 2:14

The difference is the whole old testament is about the coming of Jesus. From the building of the tabernacle to the rituals, eg the killing one bird setting another free, (death and resurrection) etc etc. Over 200 prophecies of his coming and nature were all fulfilled.

Yes she is praying to God, but God was tired of all these rituals, we wants intimacy with his people. And the only person who can bring sinners close to God is Jesus.

FlyingPika

04-03-2007, 03:23 PM

Which prophecies would these be?

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophchr.html

Mr TB

04-03-2007, 03:33 PM

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophchr.html

Hi sir

Your girlfriend is she a jewish christian, in other words does she believe Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead? It is fantastic if you have someone that understand hebrew helping you read the bible. It is just wonderful...

Mr TB

04-03-2007, 03:48 PM

It's funny that your opinion differs to that of other Biblical scholars. Many believe that there were actualy two authors for Genesis... Yes, Biblical scholars.

If i remember correctly there is the event in the bible where all the prophets but one gave the king good news. The king decided that all the prophets with the good news were correct... to is own downfall... Biblical scholars are the ones changing the actual meaning of the bible all the time...

FlyingPika

04-03-2007, 05:17 PM

Please do not see this post as a attack on you or your beliefs at all. I am merely trying to pose the question about blind belief in the Bible and to attempt to elicit a thought process as to the question posed by this thread, i.e. is the bible the whole truth, or does it indeed contain all the "truths" out there?
Hi, i can you see are very reasonable i like that. I take no offence at all.

Yet, can you explain why the bible itself is viewed by so many scholars to be the book with the most contradictory messages in it, to ever be written. We go from the almost complete destruction of Mankind during the great floods described in Genesis, The destruction of Sodom and Gamora, The wiping out of the enemies of Israel to John 3 v16??? The eye for an eye to turn the other cheek??

Sure. Jesus was coming, but almost the entire human race had become corrupted. If you read Genesis it talks about the fallen angels sleeping with the daughters of man, giving birth to giants. The only good people left were Noah and his family, and Noah preached repentance for something like 120yrs (and not one convert!). I dont think i would of taken much longer until the whole world became perverse and wicked. God was trying to keep a clean blood line from which Jesus would come. Hence satan was trying so hard to perverse it. God had to do something drastic.

Gods judgements are just, but He doesn’t want it to have to take such action. Sometimes, eg Sodom and Gomorra, a city that was perverse, where children born into this city had no chance of trying to live a righteous life, and would probably end up in hell, He removes the city to stop unnecessary future suffering.

But he is merciful, look at King Hezekiah, He was going to die when was sick, and the one prophet told him so, but because he turned his face to the wall and cried out to God, God told the prophet to go back and tell him we would have another 15 yrs to live (and confirmed this by the sun going back 20 mins). And in those 15 years he had a son who was evil, and the son turned the whole of Israel away from God and to idolatry. Hezekiah also lost all their treasure to the Babylonians etc. God knows whats best, but because of his compassion, He was moved to help one of His children crying out to Him!

Jesus said he came to "fulfil the law, not to abolish it". Gods plan all along had been love your neighbour as yourself, but you cant take a wild dog outta of the wild, dress it in a cute costume and expect it to obey some dog trainer on a movie set (REALLY BAD analogy but cant think of anything better atm).

Mark 10:5 But Jesus told them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts he wrote you this commandment.

Paul talks about later man getting a conscience, the law written on our hearts, and now a lot more is expected of us.

Once again I reiterate what i said above. I have no doubt that from a historical record perspective, what is contained in the bible and the history that it depicts, is indeed correct. I just don't and cant believe that everything that should be in there, actually is. Man decided what gospels will and wont be included in the Bible during the early days of the church and this alone, makes me view the makeup of the Bible as we have it today, with suspicion.

Well the gospels are the ones from people that lived with Jesus, or performed great miracles. The people would lie and wait in the streets hoping Paul’s shadow would fall on them so they would be healed. I did start reading the lost books of the bible, but I have so much stuff to read (im reading like 8 books at the same time) that I havent finished it yet. There is a lot of interesting stuff that gives detail to parts not in the bible, but every now and then there is something abit odd. Most people have 99% truth, 1% not 100% right. That is why the bible could only be made of the best because people where gonna study it for centuries, word for word.

Math 7:9. Or what man is there among you, of whom if his son shall ask bread, will he reach him a stone?
7:10. Or if he shall ask him a fish, will he reach him a serpent?
7:11. If you then being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children: how much more will your Father who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him?

Something this important, im sure God can get it right. Out of interest, what do you think should be added to the bible, and what should be removed, and why?

Well let me put it to you this way, I have read it, over and over, i have studied it, over and over and if we follow the thought pattern that has been indicated here, then I should be struck down for typing this on a Sunday or any day believed to be the Sabbath. It is not a case of hating the Bible, its a case of refusing to blindly believe something that was influenced by man, which writings man decided will it will include or not, and which is so completely contradictory to itself.

You talking about the guy picking up sticks. I also had a big problem with that for ages. I don’t just happily read my bible. I have to stop normally about 5 times on a page to sort out things I have a problem with/don’t understand. You have to look at it in perspective. In those days they had literally seen God. He lead them out of Egypt as a cloud/pillar of fire, he parted the red sea, he preformed so many miracles which the people had witnessed personally. He had given them the law. The person knew he shouldn’t. A gentile picking up sticks wouldn’t of been killed. But those were god’s chosen people, again from whose blood line Jesus was going to come. You know how hard it was to keep them on the right track, they seemed to at a blink of an eye turn to idolatry etc. That guy KNEW he shouldn’t be doing that, but rebelled purposely. If God hadn’t told them to remember the Sabbath and keep it holy, i wonder if they would of forgotten about God within a few generations and turned to doing whatever they felt like. I still feel sorry for the guy tho!

"Believing that some of the bible is true, is a slippery slope. Then which portions are true and which aren’t?"

I think that that statement of yours is the crux of this entire thread and I am guessing that by stating this you are saying that we cannot judge which portions are true and which are not and for this reason we should believe everything that is contained in it? If someone murders a member of my family, the Bible gives me the right to both seek revenge in an eye for an eye, but simultaneously turn the other cheek and provide this person with forgiveness. I am of course paraphrasing but I think that I am getting the idea across.

I think this is related to above when i talked about how Jesus came to fulfil the whole law, and that Moses didn’t have the final law because of the hardness of their hearts, it was too much for them to understand. First you have to realise murder is wrong before you can start loving you neighbour as yourself.

ghoti

04-03-2007, 05:24 PM

Maybe we should counter this with a question. Why are only 5 murders committed in a country where the death penalty is still in place?

Not that this has ANYTHING to to with the price of wool, but in regards to your silly side tracking argument... why does Texas have the highest murder rate in the states? This is the state that executes the most people.

FlyingPika

04-03-2007, 05:24 PM

To my mind, blind belief of the Bible and its contents is the easy way out. We were given creative and questioning minds, ...
yes by who....

...the ability to pose questions and seek answers, for a very good reason. Its easier to blindly accept than to challenge, question and ponder. If I, or any other human being were meant to blindly follow the contents of the bible, we would not have been given the ability to question its very contents. This does not affect or diminish faith in the creator, or the building of a spiritual relationship with the creator.

Yes i agree. I am an engineer, did my 4 yrs etc. And I have to understand what I read or else I tend to reject it. It makes reading the bible very difficult for me, and I often stop and have to find out more before continuing. But because of such, I don’t just give up. But at the end of the day we must come to God like “little children”, “without faith it is impossible to please God”.

But I digress, so if by your assertion, the entire contents of the Bible are completely true, and we as humans should, as a demonstration of our faith completely believe every aspect thereof , then can you explain Genesis Chap 6 Vs 1-4 KJV, concerning the Nephilim, and how these were giants, Sons of God who roamed the earth and had children with the daughters of Man, The hero's of old, Men of renown. And then explain why every culture, Greek, Roman, Inca, Azteck, Egyptian, Red Indian etc etc has tales and folk law about different gods and deities? Many other books and ancient scripts describe this aspect of human life and how it was the time of the Nephilim and what mankind learned during this time, that led to the evil that was to be eradicated by the floods. However, the Bible only contains about 7 versus in reference to this in two books that I have found. It is for this reason that I am making the hypothesis that we cannot believe that the Bible that we have today, contains everything that it should, and cannot because of these exclusions, be said to be the entire truth.
I answer as i go along, but i addressed this higher up, if you mate a human with something inhuman you going to get something not 100% human.
The bible was written for us to know god, and to have salvation. Its not a complete history leason of the world. If you reject the very means that God gave us what is left? God is serious about this:

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city,

God exalts his his word above his name. You think that while he was directing the people who wrote scripture He wouldnt point out if they wrote any errors? You think God cant even but together a true bible?
People dont want to believe the bible because they claim it is humanistic, but satan doesnt want people to believe the bible because it is God's word.

Is there any other book in the civilized world today where people have been thrown into prison for owning or translating it, burnt to death, beaten, tortured or killed for it?
It is happening in China, North Korea, and other Muslim countries. There is no other book satan hates so much.
If you dont believe this and are in ignorant bliss of it, subscribe to "The voice of the Martyrs". Email: cmi@icon.co.za and ask them to subscribe you to the "The voice of the Martyrs" newsletter. You need to give them your posal address.

All kinds of people (prostitutes, Dry By shooters, muggers, gangsters, satanists, any1) have be converted because there is power in Gods word. Has any1's life been completed turned around when they read "folk law about different gods and deities"?

nthdimension

04-03-2007, 06:39 PM

The death penalty is applicable murdering a person in Singapoer, a jail sentence of 25 years is applicable in SA.
Last time I checked Jamaica had a murder rate sixteen times that of the United Kingdom. And last I checked only one had the death penalty. I'm sure you can guess which one.

The severe punishments were to ensure the safety of the women, you have to admit it...
Rubbish. A woman can decide for herself whether she wants to put herself in harms way.

I can also add further explanation in relation to the holiness of god but that will only complicate the scene...
Oh, please do complicate the scene.

nthdimension

04-03-2007, 06:50 PM

You think God cant even but together a true bible?
Apparently not. Even God's followers think so since they ignore many things in the book.

Is there any other book in the civilized world today where people have been thrown into prison for owning or translating it, burnt to death, beaten, tortured or killed for it?
Without a doubt there would be.

It is happening in China, North Korea, and other Muslim countries.
Other Muslim countries? When did China and North Korea turn to Islam? Have they been notified?

If you are going to get persecuted for being a Christian in China or North Korea you will no doubt get persecuted for any number of other religious books and beliefs. I'm sure they're equal opportunity persecutors. There is also no doubt that China and North Korea have a long list of books that will get you a visit from the government's goons. Just mouthing off about the government would be sufficient.

I'm sure too that historically countries formerly known as Christian must have been very hospitable towards Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans and so on. They'd never stoop to persecution.

Christians love to send proselytizers to countries where people are opressed. Such people are often desperate and perfect candidates to lure into the religion.

nthdimension

04-03-2007, 06:58 PM

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophchr.html
Cherry-picked by his followers who went through the scriptures trying to find as many passages as possible they could somehow fit in with the life of Jesus. They would have done well to leave out the "born in Bethlehem" one as they had to step completely into fantasy world to make that one work. There was no Roman census. The Romans would never require people to travel back to their place of birth for a census. No-one would take their heavily pregnant wife on such a journey.

There are other historical inaccuracies.

Neo

04-03-2007, 09:04 PM

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/prophchr.html

Have you actually read the link yourself? :rolleyes: Not one of these verses talk about the coming of Jesus, the Son of God.

I randomly picked 5 of the quotes supposedly predicting the coming of christ.

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15)

But God said, "No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. (Genesis 17:19)

Let the nomads of the desert bow before him; And his enemies lick the dust. (Psalms 72:9)

As the cattle which go down into the valley, The Spirit of the LORD gave them rest. So didst Thou lead Thy people, To make for Thyself a glorious name. (Isaiah 63:14)

Thus says the LORD, "Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, Where the good way is, and walk in it; And you shall find rest for your souls. But they said, `We will not walk in it.'" (Jeremiah 6:16)

How, in God's name, can you read a prophecy of the coming of Christ in these paragraphs?????

Mr TB

05-03-2007, 02:47 PM

IN RESPONSE TO NTDIMENSION:

Comparing Jamaica with the United Kingdom will be comparing apples with pears, comparing Jamaica with South Africa is a better comparison...

Compare first world with first world, besides the penalties for murder there are other factors you consider... Jamaica/UK idiotic comparison trying to prove a point that is not valid...

Oh yes while you are on FP's case study a bit of hebrew and learn the meaning of Bethlehem. Very easy to pick that verse if you know what bethlehem means in hebrew...

ToxicBunny

05-03-2007, 02:51 PM

Mr TB

05-03-2007, 03:41 PM

How is Jamaica and SA a better comparison, one is a country of roughly 50 million citizens.. the other is a tiny island probably with maximum 1 million citizens..

1 is in the ass-end of the world on the edge of a crumbling continent, the other is an island just off america with a booming tourism trade...

Thanks confirming that NTDIMENSION's comparison was indeed not justified,
a comparison Jamaica/SA is defenitely more justified than Jamaica/UK...

noxibox

05-03-2007, 03:56 PM

Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered
What the word means is not at all relevant.

ToxicBunny

05-03-2007, 04:15 PM

nthdimension

05-03-2007, 04:20 PM

We could compare Jamaica and Singapore or we could compare the US and UK. We can come up with any number of comparisons that show a country that uses the death penalty has a much higher murder rate than another country that does not. Advocates of the death penalty are not permitted to claim other factors may be at play because their position is that the death penalty is a deciding factor.

Given Jamaica's size and population we might compare it to a large city in South Africa. It is quite possible we might be able to choose an area of similar size with similar population and come up a murder rate about the same.

The state of Singapore primarily murders people for drug trafficking.

FlyingPika

05-03-2007, 08:25 PM

Apparently not. Even God's followers think so since they ignore many things in the book.
The people in the building or the building is not the church, the church is the people who are actually following Jesus, ie not the hypocrites. Prime example the Pharisees.

Without a doubt there would be.

Such as?

Originally Posted by FlyingPika View Post
"It is happening in China, North Korea, and other Muslim countries."
Other Muslim countries? When did China and North Korea turn to Islam? Have they been notified?

Ok, that sentance is ambiguous, i meant it to be taken as: China, North korea, and other countries that are muslim.

If you are going to get persecuted for being a Christian in China or North Korea you will no doubt get persecuted for any number of other religious books and beliefs. I'm sure they're equal opportunity persecutors. There is also no doubt that China and North Korea have a long list of books that will get you a visit from the government's goons. Just mouthing off about the government would be sufficient.

I haven’t heard of Muslims giving their lifes to preach something they think their families and friends desperately need to hear? Can you please give examples? Last time checked some of the Muslims are willing to kill for their message. I still respect Muslims for their dedication to their religion.
"...a group of Chinese Christians who were caught holding a church service. The officials placed a horse trough in the middle of town and forced every man and women in that congregation to urinate into it. Then they drowned the pastor in it, right in front of their eyes! Do you know what happened? The church congregation doubled in two weeks..." Why do these Chinese people continue holding church?
In Saudia Arabia they are still crucifing christians (last time i checked 6 months ago).
The differance is when you get a nutty christian, and he does something wrong, he is going against the teachings of the christianity and doing his own thing.
But when christians are murdered it is seen as just in the eyes of the religion preforming such acts as fine. In Islam it is prefectly acceptable to kill some1 if they reject your religion. It is in the quran, im not trying to bash other religions, i am just stating how it is.
Can you please list some other religious out reach programmes in these countries that are not christian?

I'm sure too that historically countries formerly known as Christian must have been very hospitable towards Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans and so on. They'd never stoop to persecution.

I mentioned in the modern world. But the crusades where people disregarding the very bible they where forcing onto others...

Christians love to send proselytizers to countries where people are opressed. Such people are often desperate and perfect candidates to lure into the religion.
God said preach the gospel to all nations, its probably been preached in all modernised countries, what is left? Every1 is equally important in Gods eyes. And those people are probably more open to the gospel because they are not as proud as most educated people.

FlyingPika

05-03-2007, 08:28 PM

There was no Roman census. The Romans would never require people to travel back to their place of birth for a census. No-one would take their heavily pregnant wife on such a journey.
There are other historical inaccuracies.

Can you please back up such claims?

FlyingPika

05-03-2007, 08:41 PM

Have you actually read the link yourself? :rolleyes: Not one of these verses talk about the coming of Jesus, the Son of God.
I randomly picked 5 of the quotes supposedly predicting the coming of christ.

There are none so blind as those who will not see!
The explanation is to the right of each one of them and explains how each one pertains to Jesus. I think you need abit more bible knowledge to understand them. I am amazed how u missed it so i will copy and paste for you (ie i did not type this):

And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15)
Subject: seed of a woman
But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, (Galatians 4:4)

But God said, "No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. (Genesis 17:19)
Subject: descendant of Isaac
the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, (Luke 3:34)

Let the nomads of the desert bow before him; And his enemies lick the dust. (Psalms 72:9)
Subject: worshipped by shepherds
And in the same region there were some shepherds staying out in the fields, and keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened. And the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which shall be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."... And it came about when the angels had gone away from them into heaven, that the shepherds began saying to one another, "Let us go straight to Bethlehem then, and see this thing that has happened which the Lord has made known to us." (Luke 2:8-15)

As the cattle which go down into the valley, The Spirit of the LORD gave them rest. So didst Thou lead Thy people, To make for Thyself a glorious name. (Isaiah 63:14)
Thus says the LORD, "Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, Where the good way is, and walk in it; And you shall find rest for your souls. But they said, `We will not walk in it.'" (Jeremiah 6:16)
Subject: worshipped by shepherds
"Take My yoke upon you, and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart; and YOU SHALL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. For My yoke is easy, and My load is light." (Matthew 11:29-30)

Neo

05-03-2007, 08:53 PM

There are none so blind as those who will not see!
The explanation is to the right of each one of them and explains how each one pertains to Jesus. I think you need abit more bible knowledge to understand them. I am amazed how u missed it so i will copy and paste for you (ie i did not type this):

Thanks, I did actually read it in the original link.

Now I would strongly suggest you actually read it yourself. And hopefully you'll see how ridiculous the explanations are.

One verse mentions a woman, Jesus was born of a woman.... Bingo! Proof! :rolleyes:

nthdimension

05-03-2007, 09:10 PM

The people in the building or the building is not the church, the church is the people who are actually following Jesus, ie not the hypocrites.
But who does follow everything in the Bible to the letter? There are many passages from the Bible that have been posted here. Recently it was asked who had killed their children for talking back.

Such as?
If you really think that the only book banned in countries like China and North Korea is the Bible, then you truly are delusional. You may not have heard the news that they're both police states.

noxibox

05-03-2007, 09:23 PM

"...a group of Chinese Christians who were caught holding a church service. The officials placed a horse trough in the middle of town and forced every man and women in that congregation to urinate into it. Then they drowned the pastor in it, right in front of their eyes!
In which newspapers was this reported? I'd expect a group like Amnesty International to be aware of such events.

"The differance is when you get a nutty christian, and he does something wrong, he is going against the teachings of the christianity and doing his own thing.
But when christians are murdered it is seen as just in the eyes of the religion preforming such acts as fine.
The Bible obviously allows for the killing of others if you think you have a good reason. The just war.

Can you please list some other religious out reach programmes in these countries that are not christian?
You'll find that Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus all do charitable work. Christians don't have a monopoly on being 'altruistic'. More importantly secular organisations do extensive relief work in many countries. How many Chinese dissidents oppose the government because they're Christians?

those people are probably more open to the gospel because they are not as proud as most educated people.
They're just more vulnerable, more desperate.

Christians might be persecuted in some Muslim countries. If we are going to go by how long the religion has existed, then the Muslims have a few hundred years to go. Everywhere else it is just nonsense to claim Christians are uniquely persecuted.

ghoti

05-03-2007, 09:36 PM

noxibox

05-03-2007, 10:02 PM

They are desperate to believe their religion is special and unique.

Are they the only ones who stick with their religion in the face of adversity?

FlyingPika

05-03-2007, 10:08 PM

Thanks, I did actually read it in the original link.

Now I would strongly suggest you actually read it yourself. And hopefully you'll see how ridiculous the explanations are.

One verse mentions a woman, Jesus was born of a woman.... Bingo! Proof! :rolleyes:

When in the context of God coming to earth to dwell amongst man, saying hes gonna come in a fiery chariot from heaven wouldnt seem so far out.

FlyingPika

05-03-2007, 11:35 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/194951.stm

Why is FlyingPika making this out to be only a Christian problem in China?

...and regarding Saudi Arabia... its not just Christians who are persecuted, its all other religions.

I see that is unfortunate what china is doing trying to control all religions. But thankfully none of those monks where killed.

FlyingPika

05-03-2007, 11:36 PM

They are desperate to believe their religion is special and unique.

Are they the only ones who stick with their religion in the face of adversity?

Would you be willing to die for something you desperately hope is true, or something you know is true?

nthdimension

06-03-2007, 11:09 AM

Tibetan nun shot dead; other Tibetans feared killed on way to Nepal (http://www.savetibet.org/news/newsitem.php?id=1036)

Monks reveal brutal state crackdown (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/19/wtibet19.xml)

Tibetan monk shot to death by Chinese police (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/10/03/2003205362)

nthdimension

06-03-2007, 11:10 AM

Would you be willing to die for something you desperately hope is true, or something you know is true?
People who are not free hope they will one day be free and die for it. No religion required.

ghoti

06-03-2007, 11:12 AM

I see that is unfortunate what china is doing trying to control all religions. But thankfully none of those monks where killed.

Do you have any idea of life outside of your own world? Do you have any idea how shallow your comment is? Tibetan monks are the most persecuted in of the religions in China.

Mr TB

06-03-2007, 02:53 PM

What the word means is not at all relevant.

Did you spill your coffee when you actually found the hebrew meaning of the word :)

That's why you are trying to hide the relevance, don't you?

Mr TB

06-03-2007, 03:01 PM

IN RESPONSE TO NTDIMENSION:

"The Romans would never require people to travel back to their place of birth for a census."

How can you say that, or how do you know?

Mr TB

06-03-2007, 03:06 PM

Actually MR TB, I was saying that YOUR comparison is completely UNjustified and incorrect..... I was not commenting on or confirming anyone elses comparisons.

Please stop trolling, its getting irritating.

You tried to back your comment with a somewhat unacceptable example and i think you were the actual troll not me...

Mr TB

06-03-2007, 03:15 PM

What the word means is not at all relevant.

"Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be registered "

Cherry picked verses to confirm this quote of yours. Must have checked the Tora carefully to ensure the verses fits the quote...

nthdimension

06-03-2007, 03:46 PM

Quite a stretch from:
"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity."

To:
"And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of David, in order to register, along with Mary, who was engaged to him, and was with child.... And she gave birth to her first-born son; and she wrapped Him in cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn."

You can't fault the Jews for saying he wasn't the Messiah.

Mr TB

06-03-2007, 04:22 PM

IN RESPONSE TO NTDIMENSION:

I am not blaming the jewish people for anything. I apologise if i suggested that at any time... They expected a KING that is also true, but that would not break down satan's power, to overcome satan Jesus had to come and live between us...

Let me share something with you. The temple had 3 entrances, the door, the truth and the life. When you walked through the 3rd door you were in the holiest of holy places...where god is.

So the pharisees knew who Jesus said he was when he said no-one come to the Father but through me. I am the door, the truth and the life... he 3 entrances you had to pass to enter the holiest of holies...

They know he referred to himself as the son of god...

ghoti

06-03-2007, 04:25 PM

nthdimension

06-03-2007, 04:44 PM

There is no satan as an adversary of God. In Judaism the angel is doing what God wants. As far as I am aware in Judaism God is everything, good and evil. I'm not sure why Christians felt the need to change either of these things.

nthdimension

06-03-2007, 04:46 PM

Deuteronomy 30:15 states, See, I [God] have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil.

In Isaiah 45:7, the prophet describes God's creation plan when he reports that, I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I the Lord do all these things.

Mr TB

06-03-2007, 04:48 PM

The Jews dont believe in Satan.... Satan only appeared with the Christian religion, so what you are saying does not make sense.

I don't say they have to, they don't believe in hell either. Most of them believe Jesus did not dwell on earth either... Jesus came to correct the misconceptions they don't want believe that, i can't change it.

What is the believe of christians jews, not those hanging onto judaism...

ToxicBunny

06-03-2007, 06:07 PM

You tried to back your comment with a somewhat unacceptable example and i think you were the actual troll not me...

Ke?

What unacceptable example would that be?

Tux

07-03-2007, 10:26 AM

http://fukung.net/v/163/nguyen_essay3.jpg :D

Mr TB

07-03-2007, 04:24 PM

Pr⊕phet

08-03-2007, 01:10 AM

wow a whole 6 pager.... ;)

Tux

08-03-2007, 11:11 AM

IN RESPONSE TO GRU:

Mahatma Gandhi- what a statement to make!
Telling christians their king is fine but his children (they) are washouts!
That's judging because the person is attacked while the idea accepted?
My understanding is the idea should be scrutinised and the person left alone.

You know... I do think Gandhi had people like you in mind when he said that dodo. Or politely put.. leave my bloody sig alone.

Mr TB

08-03-2007, 01:11 PM

I went back, checked and it seems the hebrew word sheol with reference to hades first appear. Reading the bible carefully i can not see why those in hades is not going to end up in the lake of fire. Here is some quotes...

"PROV5v5 Her feet go down to death; her steps take hold of Sheol (Hades, the place of the dead)."

"Isaiah14v15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol (Hades), to the innermost recesses of the pit (the region of the dead)."

"Luke 10v15And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted unto heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades (the regions of the dead)."

"Luke 16v23And in Hades (the realm of the dead), being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far away, and Lazarus in his bosom"

"REV20v14 Then death and Hades ([d]the state of death or disembodied existence) were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire."
"REV20v15 And if anyone's [name] was not found recorded in the Book of Life, he was hurled into the lake of fire."

Gehenna, the Greek for hell, i did not even account for that...

nthdimension

08-03-2007, 02:00 PM

In Judaism there is no hell as conceived by Christians.

Mr TB

08-03-2007, 02:18 PM

IN RESPONSE TO NTDIMENSION:

Judaism do also not accept the Cross either do they?
What is te viewpoint of jewish christians. Their viewpoint should line up with Paul, John, James, Peter, etc...what are they advocating?

ToxicBunny

08-03-2007, 02:46 PM

jewish christians?????? Where did they rock up from?

Mr TB

08-03-2007, 03:36 PM

Well... apparently the Jews were the very first christians, but followers of christ were called christians in Antioch for the first time...

Try your free encyclopedia wiki...

noxibox

08-03-2007, 03:42 PM

In Judaism there is no hell as conceived by Christians.
I wonder if this happened because early Christians were perhaps ignorant of many aspects of the scripture. Turning hell into a place of eternal damnation and Lucifer into an enemy of God may just have been a means to frighten people.

jewish christians?????? Where did they rock up from?
Converts I suppose.

ToxicBunny

08-03-2007, 04:50 PM

FlyingPika

08-03-2007, 08:55 PM

nthdimension

08-03-2007, 10:52 PM

If you want to mistranslate, then you can translate ra as anything you like.

Tux

08-03-2007, 11:11 PM

Mr TB : yes some jews did become Christians... but there has never been such a thing as a jewish christian... just not possible... how can you not accept the new jestament and accept it at the same time?

Methinks the meatball formely known as dodo meant jews as a nationality and not a religion in that context
Further proof that i need a long holiday, i'm starting to understand dodo-ese

Mr TB

09-03-2007, 04:40 PM

IN RESPONSE TO GRU:

I know of at least two one called PETER, he was to convert the jews, the circumcised, those that will be called jewish christians,

and secondly PAUL, he was to convert the heathen, the uncircumcised, those that will be called christians.
I know at least 2 jewish christians Peter and Paul...

ToxicBunny

09-03-2007, 08:07 PM

Mr TB: there is no such thing as a jewish christian... period and klaar.. they are non-compatible religious belief structures.. a person cannot believe in both at the same time.

Pr⊕phet

09-03-2007, 08:17 PM

thats like having a buddist christian ;)

Claymore

09-03-2007, 09:37 PM

Mr TB: there is no such thing as a jewish christian... period and klaar.. they are non-compatible religious belief structures.. a person cannot believe in both at the same time.

Well, "Jewish" can be used to refer to religion as well as to culture. So one could, in theory, be culturally Jewish, but Christian in religion, much like people like Isaac Asimov were atheist Jews.

DarthCat

10-03-2007, 12:45 AM

The Bible is mybe inspired by God but is written by humans so therefore it is not 100% correct

Pr⊕phet

11-03-2007, 11:46 PM

in reference to Garyb01's post (Excluded Gospels)

just a few for now

early christian writings
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/

Books banned by the Council of Laodicea
http://reluctant-messenger.com/council-of-laodicea.htm

The Epistle of Barnabas
http://reluctant-messenger.com/barnabus13.htm

First Clement
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1clement.html

Second Clement
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/2clement.html

The Apostles' Creed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostles'_Creed

The Shepherd of Hermas
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/shepherd.html

Epistle to the Ephesians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Ephesians
-------------------------------------------------------------

Pr⊕phet

15-03-2007, 10:46 PM

THE GNOSTIC SOCIETY LIBRARY
The Gnostic Society Library contains a vast collection of primary documents relating to the Gnostic tradition as well as a selection of in-depth audio lectures and brief archive notes designed to orient study of the documents, their sources, and the religious tradition they represent.

http://www.gnosis.org/library.html

Nick333

15-03-2007, 11:16 PM

The Bible is mybe inspired by God but is written by humans so therefore it is not 100% correct

Any ideas on how correct it actually is? 99%? 90%? 50%? Any idea which bits are correct?

You see, the problem is if some of it is wrong and we have no way of objectively judging which bits are right the whole really has little value.

There are Christians who realize this and have decided that therefore the whole must be 100% correct contrary to all logic and reason. They also realize that it is illogical and unreasonable to do so, so they abandon logic and reason. These Christians are known as fundamentalists. They are scary.

There are other Christians who choose to pick which bits are right and which are wrong. They fail to realize that if they are able to make that choice then they are making that choice based on a morality that they had before reading the bible in the first place therefore their personal religion is a tailor made thing based on their own personal taste. Which is fine except alot of this type of Christian will still try to tell you that their morality is the one that God came up with and the one that we all should adhere to. These Christians are also scary.

Neo

15-03-2007, 11:34 PM

There are other Christians who choose to pick which bits are right and which are wrong. They fail to realize that if they are able to make that choice then they are making that choice based on a morality that they had before reading the bible in the first place therefore their personal religion is a tailor made thing based on their own personal taste. Which is fine except alot of this type of Christian will still try to tell you that their morality is the one that God came up with and the one that we all should adhere to. These Christians are also scary.

Then you find every Christian decides on his own right and wrong bits, and claim everyone else are not true Christians. The scary bit is they fails to see that they themselves practise what they accuse the others of.

Mr TB

16-03-2007, 09:02 AM

Then you find every Christian decides on his own right and wrong bits, and claim everyone else are not true Christians. The scary bit is they fails to see that they themselves practise what they accuse the others of.

What type of errors will the bible contain? Place names?, Quantities? What is your suggestion? The names of people? Ages of people?

A rule " do not steal ", does not seem to be wrong at any point...

Your assumption that Paul and Jesus contradict each other, because you don't want to see it is not the case.
Your assumption that God is a murderer because you don't want to see he is forgiving.
Your assumption you have not been empowered to rule on earth this relieving you from your responsibility of ruling on this earth?
Your assumptions of the wrongs in the bible is wrong,,,

Your assumption that you can keep on pointing the finger at christians? It is hypocrasy on the side of the non-religious.

noxibox

16-03-2007, 09:11 AM

I think we're all still waiting for an example of even one Christian who follows the whole Bible.

The Cosmos

16-03-2007, 09:17 AM

Nick333

16-03-2007, 10:07 AM

False interpretations and false translations are rife. Therefore, those who believe those lies, run with it, and start their own church. It is the duty of every christian to rightly devide the Word. Unfortunetly, most fail horribly.

:) And of course every Christian who interprets the bible instead of taking it literally believes this of every other Christian who interprets the bible differently.

PostmanPot

16-03-2007, 10:17 AM

Mr TB

16-03-2007, 02:41 PM

I think we're all still waiting for an example of even one Christian who follows the whole Bible.

That is why Jesus came died for our sins and is sitting at the right hand of the Father... We as christians understand the bible is not a rulebook full of laws that you need to follow if you are going to end up in heaven...

We fully understand that we as christians are justified by faith. Did you see the word FAITH!

Pr⊕phet

19-03-2007, 05:48 PM

anyone else's real, from own self opinion ?

The Cosmos

21-03-2007, 01:08 PM

Like yourself :rolleyes:

Instead of saying such utter garbage, why don't you try and disprove me.

The Cosmos

21-03-2007, 01:09 PM

:) And of course every Christian who interprets the bible instead of taking it literally believes this of every other Christian who interprets the bible differently.

The bible is firstly, about Christ, and secondly about Israel. If you understand those, you will understand most. The OT and NT is about Christ, and Israel.

Claymore

21-03-2007, 03:11 PM

The bible is firstly, about Christ, and secondly about Israel. If you understand those, you will understand most. The OT and NT is about Christ, and Israel.

Why not about Judea?

noxibox

21-03-2007, 04:54 PM

Jesus doesn't feature in the OT.

The Cosmos

21-03-2007, 08:20 PM

Jesus doesn't feature in the OT.

I suggest you go do a bit of research, and then come back.

teraside

21-03-2007, 08:23 PM

Jesus doesn't feature in the OT.

Do you want a book? It's cheap, the description is Afrikaans, but the book is in English as well ;)

The Wonder of Jesus in the Old Testament (http://www.reformed.org.za/afrikaans/Boeke/The%20wonder%20of%20Jesus%20in%20the%20old%20testa ment.htm)

icyrus

21-03-2007, 09:15 PM

I wish I would be able to see the day when people are capable and willing to think for themselves. Unfortunately, as this forum has shown, that is a long long way in the future. If ever.

fivelza

21-03-2007, 09:54 PM

I wish I would be able to see the day when people are capable and willing to think for themselves. Unfortunately, as this forum has shown, that is a long long way in the future. If ever.

Not so icyrus, they just come up with answers you don't like ;)

PostmanPot

21-03-2007, 09:58 PM

Instead of saying such utter garbage, why don't you try and disprove me.

Aren't you the one who doesn't believe in the Trinity?

The Cosmos

22-03-2007, 08:39 AM

What has that got to do with anything ?

Neo

22-03-2007, 08:58 AM

I suggest you go do a bit of research, and then come back.

Noxibox is quite right. Jesus does not feature in the OT.

PostmanPot

22-03-2007, 09:21 AM

What has that got to do with anything ?

Why don't you ask FlyingPika or dodo?

The Cosmos

22-03-2007, 11:05 AM

Noxibox is quite right. Jesus does not feature in the OT.

i'm not going to waste my time by explaining something had has been established and proven over and over. I will say this, Christ lived before the beginning of creation. Google it. And then after that, you do the math.

Pr⊕phet

11-04-2007, 08:01 AM

i'm not going to waste my time by explaining something had has been established and proven over and over. I will say this, Christ lived before the beginning of creation. Google it. And then after that, you do the math.

as the logos right ?

The Cosmos

11-04-2007, 09:06 AM

Why not about Judea?

Judea is one small part in the whole picture.

jetpacman

01-05-2007, 08:50 AM

I'm joining this debate on the tail end. I just want to add my two cents ( not that its worth much with the exchange rate)

Bible = Broken Telephone.

If you ever played broken telephone at school you will know what I mean.

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 09:50 AM

as the logos right ?

right

noxibox

01-05-2007, 11:20 AM

Bible = Broken Telephone.

If you ever played broken telephone at school you will know what I mean.
Particularly the New Testament. Stories of Jesus were told orally for decades before they were written down, by people who had never met him.

Mr TB

01-05-2007, 01:56 PM

Noxibox is quite right. Jesus does not feature in the OT.

Noxibox and Neo are indeed wrong, Jesus indeed feature in the OT...

If you look for Him you will indeed find him...

PostmanPot

01-05-2007, 02:00 PM

Noxibox and Neo are indeed wrong, Jesus indeed feature in the OT...

If you look for Him you will indeed find him...

Okay, where?

Neo

01-05-2007, 02:14 PM

Okay, where?

In the tent pens remember? The Israelites were told to only knock them in halfway as a sign of Jesus. :rolleyes: This was, in any case, dodo's answer to the question.

We've asked this question before and the links we got was just hilarious. I don't think the people who posted the links ever read them. Reality is there is no direct mention of Jesus in the OT.

PostmanPot

01-05-2007, 02:16 PM

Exactly ;)

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 02:45 PM

Okay, where?

He was the angel that spoke to Samson's father. That's one example. I'm still trying to find more examples.

ghoti

01-05-2007, 02:54 PM

He was the angel that spoke to Samson's father. That's one example. I'm still trying to find more examples.

Actually, that was father xmas. Dont you read your bible? It clearly indicates that that angel was father xmas.

PostmanPot

01-05-2007, 03:02 PM

Bwahaha, angels & demons is SO 2000 years ago!

Mr TB

01-05-2007, 03:14 PM

He was the angel that spoke to Samson's father. That's one example. I'm still trying to find more examples.

Standing next to Abraham as Sodom and Gomorra was destroyed...

Neo you keep on confirming DouwDouw's PM that you pasted in public as long as you can't leave the pegs behind...

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 03:59 PM

Bwahaha, angels & demons is SO 2000 years ago!

Yeah, so what ? If you can't contribute then stay away.

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 04:00 PM

Standing next to Abraham as Sodom and Gomorra was destroyed...

That's very interesting. Never thought of it that way. ;)

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 04:37 PM

w1z4rd
This message is hidden because w1z4rd is on your ignore list.

What ? I can't see what you're saying ? Rather not respond if you won't get a response. Moron. :rolleyes:

PostmanPot

01-05-2007, 04:50 PM

Yeah, so what ? If you can't contribute then stay away.

Aye cap'n!

In turn, will you stop post-whoring? :D

Actually, that was father xmas. Dont you read your bible? It clearly indicates that that angel was father xmas.

There ya go ol' sport.

Neo

01-05-2007, 06:56 PM

Standing next to Abraham as Sodom and Gomorra was destroyed...

Neo you keep on confirming DouwDouw's PM that you pasted in public as long as you can't leave the pegs behind...

You are a special one....

Where did I 'paste' any PM of yours regarding your silly peg sack-of-lies?

YOU POSTED IT!:rolleyes:

You can't undo something like this where you openly lied, trying to tell forumites there are passages in the OT directly referencing Jesus in an attempt to create the impression the OT spoke of Jesus.

Please give us the proof that it was Jesus who stood "next to Abraham as Sodom and Gomorra was destroyed".

@ I&J: Please give us the proof that it was Jesus who "was the angel that spoke to Samson's father"

Mr TB

01-05-2007, 06:59 PM

That's very interesting. Never thought of it that way. ;)

When Daniel's friends was thrown into the hot oven, they were 3 correct?
The King was startled because he saw 4 people in there correct?
Well that is another place where the KING OF GLORY appears in the OT.

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 07:10 PM

When Daniel's friends was thrown into the hot oven, they were 3 correct?
The King was startled because he saw 4 people in there correct?
Well that is another place where the KING OF GLORY appears in the OT.

Uitstekend. Baie dankie. Ek het 'n studie gedoen oor waar Christus in die OT verskyn, nog ver van klaar. Jy help baie. Ek waardeer dit. As ek kon, het ek jou hand geskud. Dankie.

Neo

01-05-2007, 07:15 PM

When Daniel's friends was thrown into the hot oven, they were 3 correct?
The King was startled because he saw 4 people in there correct?
Well that is another place where the KING OF GLORY appears in the OT.

Which of your 10 bibles did you get that from? I just checked all my copies and they say it was an angel.

Never knew Jesus was an angel, always thought he was one of the trinity. :confused:

Another though; If Jesus is actually an angel, is Lucifer his boet? Makes sense in a way, does it not? Good 'ol brotherly competitiveness for daddy's empire.

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 07:33 PM

Another though; If Jesus is actually an angel, is Lucifer his boet? Makes sense in a way, does it not? Good 'ol brotherly competitiveness for daddy's empire.

The mormons teach that. However, lucifer was the highest angel in heaven behind Christ. Christ was far beyond lucifer "in rank" if you will.

Neo

01-05-2007, 07:39 PM

The mormons teach that. However, lucifer was the highest angel in heaven behind Christ. Christ was far beyond lucifer "in rank" if you will.

OK, don't quite understand the angelic pecking order. Where is this documented?

Also, I assume being an angel, Jesus is not God's son?

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 07:45 PM

OK, don't quite understand the angelic pecking order. Where is this documented?

Also, I assume being an angel, Jesus is not God's son?

Ok, as to your first question. Read all the accounts with regards to lucifer. Acts says Christ was superior to all the angels because He had a superior Name. In the OT i think it is, it talks about lucifer being favourable to all the other angels. However, because of Christ's name that makes Him, even Higher than lucifer. It's all in there. Just take e-sword (http://www.e-sword.net), and look for it.

Your second question.
The reference, the Sons of God, is used a few times in the OT. Look it up. Christ was an angel, but He was also the Son of God. The promised Saviour. There was lots of Sons of God, but none except Christ was a Saviour. And of course, Lucifer was a rebel. :eek:

Mr TB

01-05-2007, 08:11 PM

You are a special one....

Where did I 'paste' any PM of yours regarding your silly peg sack-of-lies?

YOU POSTED IT!:rolleyes:

You can't undo something like this where you openly lied, trying to tell forumites there are passages in the OT directly referencing Jesus in an attempt to create the impression the OT spoke of Jesus.

Please give us the proof that it was Jesus who stood "next to Abraham as Sodom and Gomorra was destroyed".

@ I&J: Please give us the proof that it was Jesus who "was the angel that spoke to Samson's father"

Don't troll Neo, provide the prove that it was not the case like are suppose to if you really want to debate...don't you know the principles of debate...

The golden rule
The platinum rule
The principle of charity.

Read on it then you will stop insisting on proof and rather provide the proof that something is not... that is the honest and correct way... of debate...
BTW... hypocracy isn't that when you keep hammering on one thing trying to send someone on a guilt trip... but blaming them for doing exactly that?

Neo

01-05-2007, 08:21 PM

Ok, as to your first question. Read all the accounts with regards to lucifer. Acts says Christ was superior to all the angels because He had a superior Name. In the OT i think it is, it talks about lucifer being favourable to all the other angels. However, because of Christ's name that makes Him, even Higher than lucifer. It's all in there. Just take e-sword (http://www.e-sword.net), and look for it.

Your second question.
The reference, the Sons of God, is used a few times in the OT. Look it up. Christ was an angel, but He was also the Son of God. The promised Saviour. There was lots of Sons of God, but none except Christ was a Saviour. And of course, Lucifer was a rebel. :eek:

Damn, battling to find it. Won't you post the relevant versus where it says "Christ was an angel, but He was also the Son of God. The promised Saviour" in the OT?

And ".....lucifer being favourable to all the other angels. However, because of Christ's name that makes Him, even Higher than lucifer" please. I know the bit about about Lucifer being the fav angel, but where does it say Chirst is even higher because of his name?

Mr TB

01-05-2007, 08:33 PM

OK, don't quite understand the angelic pecking order. Where is this documented?

Also, I assume being an angel, Jesus is not God's son?

Alhoewel jy nou naskoolse opleiding en ek dink twee grade het, het jy nog 'n paar dinge om te leer wat die Here Jesus Christus aanbetref...

Indien daar in die OT verwys word na die "Angel of the Lord", dit doen geen afbreuk aan Hom as Christus nie, dit is bloot 'n vertaalkwessie verwys dit na Christus...

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 08:40 PM

ok, i'll try, i've had a long day, but will try my best.

Damn, battling to find it. Won't you post the relevant versus where it says "Christ was an angel, but He was also the Son of God. The promised Saviour" in the OT?

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word... the Word according to Revelation is Christ.

In the beginning meaning at creation.

Another one.
Joh 8:58 - ....Before Abraham was, I am. That should actually be translated I was. Still it confirms He was before Abraham.

If He was in the OT, the only logical explanation was that He was an angel.

This is just two.

Son of God.
John acknowledge He was the Son of God
Joh 20:31.

Demons acknowledge Christ is the Son of God.
Matt 8:29

Mark acknowledges
Mar 1:1

Joh 9:35-37 Christ acknowledges He is the Son of God.

And ".....lucifer being favourable to all the other angels. However, because of Christ's name that makes Him, even Higher than lucifer" please.

Here you have to use a bit of logic. Christ was the Saviour, and Lucifer was bannished to earth. And the you have to use the below verse in context.

I know the bit about about Lucifer being the fav ange, but where does it say Chirst is even higher because of his name?

Apologies. It's in Hebrews. Heb 1:4.

Neo

01-05-2007, 09:02 PM

ok, i'll try, i've had a long day, but will try my best.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word... the Word according to Revelation is Christ.

In the beginning meaning at creation.

Another one.
Joh 8:58 - ....Before Abraham was, I am. That should actually be translated I was. Still it confirms He was before Abraham.

If He was in the OT, the only logical explanation was that He was an angel.

This is just two.

Son of God.
John acknowledge He was the Son of God
Joh 20:31.

Demons acknowledge Christ is the Son of God.
Matt 8:29

Mark acknowledges
Mar 1:1

Joh 9:35-37 Christ acknowledges He is the Son of God.

Here you have to use a bit of logic. Christ was the Saviour, and Lucifer was bannished to earth. And the you have to use the below verse in context.

Apologies. It's in Hebrews. Heb 1:4.

Maybe you missed my question, being tired and all: Where in the Old Testament is Jesus mentioned? All your quote above reference the NT that was written AD. But let's maybe switch to the new thread on the subject.

The_Librarian

01-05-2007, 09:09 PM

bleugh

looks like I have to accelerate my Daniel books then...

I accept the fact that the 4th man in the oven was Jesus Christ. Keep in mind that the various Bible translations tend to have different interpretations, or meanings, on the same verses.

The preferred translation for Bible studies is the King James version.

The Cosmos

01-05-2007, 09:09 PM

Maybe you missed my question, being tired and all: Where in the Old Testament is Jesus mentioned? All your quote above reference the NT that was written AD. But let's maybe switch to the new thread on the subject.

As i mentioned in a previous thread/post, He appeared to Samson's father. Now, you have to remember the scriptures I gave. That confirms He was in OT times. Now, you have to search for where He appears. In some places, other messengers appear, and other places He appears. I am still trying to study that, and have not even come halfway with it. So, for you like me, it takes some time, but eventually you'll get there. There's no quick answers really.

Pr⊕phet

01-05-2007, 11:57 PM

"In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God."

Jesus Christ the Logos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_the_Logos

Pr⊕phet

01-05-2007, 11:58 PM

oops does that read Logos was God !!! ;)

Rodin

20-01-2008, 06:15 PM

"In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God."

Jesus Christ the Logos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_the_Logos

As translated from the original :

1. In the beginning [Genesis 1:1. 2:4. Proverbs 8:23. 1 John 1:1] was the Word and the Word was for Yehvah Elohiym [Proverbs 16:4. Isaiah 53:10. John 18:37] and the Word was of Yehvah Elohiym [Revelation 19:13].

See:

http://www.truthseekers.co.za/content/view/152/48/

Eugene66

20-01-2008, 07:30 PM

Eugene66

20-01-2008, 07:37 PM

"In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God."

Jesus Christ the Logos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ_the_Logoshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

In the beginning was thought (logical thinking, word.) And the thought was with God and the thought was God.

All creation especially deliberate creation begins with thought. In our case logical thought. And the thought was with the thinker (God) and the thought was the thinker. Creator and creation becomming one in the creation process.

rwenzori

20-01-2008, 07:40 PM

Correct translation of John 1:1

You a biblical scholar then? Read ancient Greek and Hebrew?

Pr⊕phet

20-01-2008, 08:01 PM

holy $#!+, now an old fossil has been dug up here...

The Cosmos

20-01-2008, 08:39 PM

this is a prehistoric one :eek::D

Rodin

20-01-2008, 10:09 PM

You a biblical scholar then? Read ancient Greek and Hebrew?

I do my research and like to search out the truth on matters. :)