The Bible.... Myth, Real, or Both?

[dtknowles]

So if I wrote a book, titled it “Tim”, and you read it later thinking that Tim must have been the author... What difference would it make if the information was accurate?
The fact that these NT books were often handed down verbally for years before ever being written down could well be attributed to the fear of LIONS by the early Christians.
If “John”, for instance, is an accurate accounting of John’s teachings and recounts what he witnessed accurately, what difference does it make?... None.

I’d be a poor student of history if I could only accept that things were said, or done, when they were written by the guy that DID it.... Can you imagine how much history would be lost if the criteria you suggest was actually adopted and applied to the scholarly works we depend on today?
Thankfully, we don’t view historical documents with blinders on.

It you wrote a book titled "Tim" years after I died but did not put your name on it as author but just claimed the book was the "world according to Tim" we might be skeptical.

Consider


"The author of First Timothy has been traditionally identified as the Apostle Paul. He is named as the author of the letter in the text (1:1). Nineteenth and twentieth century scholarship questioned the authenticity of the letter, with many scholars suggesting that First Timothy, along with Second Timothy and Titus, are not original to Paul, but rather to an unknown Christian writing some time in the late-first-to-mid-2nd century.[1] Most scholars now affirm this view.[2][3] As evidence for this perspective, they put forward that the Pastoral Epistles contain 306 words that Paul does not use in his unquestioned letters, that their style of writing is different from that of his unquestioned letters, that they reflect conditions and a church organization not current in Paul's day, and that they do not appear in early lists of his canonical works.[4]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_Timothy

Tim

[1hole]

So if I wrote a book, titled it “Tim”, and you read it later thinking that Tim must have been the author... What difference would it make if the information was accurate?

.......Thankfully, we don’t view historical documents with blinders on.

Roger that.

"All scripture is inspired by God" so the inspired writers wrote what they were inspired by God to put to paper. So, on final analysis, the only authorship that matters was God.

The New Testament was completed and copies were being circulated by about 70 years after the cross. Quite a few old men still had living memories of the early church years so if the copies had any meaningful differences they would have been known and destroyed then.

Bottom line, quibbles over specific Bible authorship may be interesting to some folk but it really doesn't matter to Christians who the original writer was; it was all God breathed.

[cainttype]

You seem more interested in Wiki, and less interested in people...
The views of people concerning Biblical text was, and is, the purpose of this thread. Admittedly, these threads often take on a life of their own and end up in strange places.

“Christians accept that God is the author of the New Testament.
They also accept that men were inspired by God to put quill to parchment, preserving God’s word for mankind.”

Once you grasp the reality of that quote, it doesn't matter who anyone thinks the transcribers were... The words are the only thing that is important to them.
What can’t be “proven”, is that the words of those books are inaccurate.

[dtknowles]

"You seem more interested in Wiki, and less interested in people..."

Wiki is people. It is a community or did you not know that?

Tim

[cainttype]

"You seem more interested in Wiki, and less interested in people..."

Wiki is people. It is a community or did you not know that?

Tim

Wiki is a community that does not verify any of the info it allows to be posted, so any fool can say anything.. That is proven.
Wiki also has a lot of good info... So again, what is your point?

[Eddie Southgate]

In my mind it is real and not open to debate . I am probably not a good Christian but I am a Christian and as such every word in the bible regardless of version is just exactly that ,,,,,The Word . It is the most important instructional manual ever written and is unfortunately the one least read by those who need to read it the most . That is all I have to say in the matter .

Eddie

[dtknowles]

Wiki is a community that does not verify any of the info it allows to be posted, so any fool can say anything.. That is proven.
Wiki also has a lot of good info... So again, what is your point?

It is vigorous fact checked, you don't seem to know about Wikipedia. What I posted referenced sources, check them.

[cainttype]

It is vigorous fact checked, you don't seem to know about Wikipedia. What I posted referenced sources, check them.

I can only suggest you RE-read post #256... It appears you are intent on arguing with yourself, because I stated clearly the consensus on the authors of the books of The New Testament.
So for the third time... What is your point?

“IF” WIKI is being “vigorously” fact checked, it is a NEW thing.
WIKI has long accepted contributions without verification, so a better policy would be a GOOD thing.
I use WIKi quite often, but wouldn’t claim it as my “source”... That would be kinda lazy, intellectually, and seems to forego actually offering an honest opinion on the original subject matter.

[dtknowles]

I can only suggest you RE-read post #256... It appears you are intent on arguing with yourself, because I stated clearly the consensus on the authors of the books of The New Testament.
So for the third time... What is your point?

“IF” WIKI is being “vigorously” fact checked, it is a NEW thing.
WIKI has long accepted contributions without verification, so a better policy would be a GOOD thing.
I use WIKi quite often, but wouldn’t claim it as my “source”... That would be kinda lazy, intellectually, and seems to forego actually offering an honest opinion on the original subject matter.

Unverified Wiki posts are noted to be so.

Tim

[cainttype]

Unverified Wiki posts are noted to be so.

Tim

It appears we finally agree...IF WIKI verified posts prior to posting you would never have seen any disclaimer banner (which is not automatically applied, but used for suspicious posts or when someone objects to the UN-verified info but hasn’t supplied evidence supporting their point of view).
WIKI does NOT “verify” information BEFORE it is posted, although they may refuse to allow a post to be published because it’s obviously false.
WIKI’s “verification process”, or lack thereof, is simply challenges bought by readers to posted information where the challenger offers contradictory information to correct or disprove something ALREADY posted by WIKI. That’s a far cry from “vigorous” fact-checking by WIKI’s admins prior to throwing it out there.
That is why WIKI is never used by anyone with any journalistic integrity as a “solid source”.

WIKI is a valuable reference resource because of the amount of information it has archived, and much of it is good and accurate.

Here’s a good example:
“In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses[2] and normalizing tangential discussion,[3] whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.”

I’d consider that accurate.

This thread is dedicated to personal views on Biblical texts.
I have zero interest in anyone’s views on WIKI, so I’m bored with that subject and will no longer entertain it.

[DeputyDog25]

I believe there are limits to God’s power. Otherwise a loving Father (God) would remove lethal threats (Satan) from His children (mankind). God sacrificed His Son on our behalf so we may have our sins expunged. To me, it indicates God, at least then, and possibly currently is unable to defeat Satan. But, in time, that will happen...or so it is written.

Genesis “works” if the days are much longer periods of time. 24 hour days are unrealistic and not supported by our understanding of the universe, geology, genetics, and archeology.

God revealed creation in a manner that was understandable to man at the time. KISS. In essence, it is not important if creation took 6 days or 6 billion years...only that He was the Creator. Early man was not prepared to understand. It would have been like explaining how a child is born to a two year old. All the two year old needs to know is that mommy and daddy love each other made made them. It is not the whole story but close enough and serves the purpose.

What I see here is an attempt to limit God based on the limits of man. God is not limited by our tiny little minds and brains, how could he be. God is the creator of everything in the universe. I don’t think you really believe that God is unable to defeat Satan and if you do you clearly are lacking in your knowledge of the Bible. Our loving God allows each and everything that happens in the universe including “lethal threats”, evil, sin, etc... for his own plan which our minds are too small to understand. God gave us the opportunity in the beginning to live in a perfect situation but because of free will and temptation, that option disappeared. As far as there being limits to God’s power, I think it’s more of a case of you limiting God’s power in your mind for whatever reason. Clearly a God that can create the entire universe and each and every beautiful and astounding things around us i.e, animals, plants, mountains, oceans, etc... is NOT limited in any way.

[1hole]

What I see here is an attempt to limit God based on the limits of man. God is not limited by our tiny little minds and brains, how could he be. God is the creator of everything in the universe. I don’t think you really believe that God is unable to defeat Satan and if you do you clearly are lacking in your knowledge of the Bible.

Deputy, if I may ....

Don't know how long you've followed Tim's posts but he is quite odd for someone professing to be a Christian.

To honestly (I think) paraphrase Tim (for brevity), at various times he has told us:

* Says God is not all knowing, not all powerful and lives in a constant struggle with Satan

* Says man is in control of human history, not God

* Faith in Jesus as savior is NOT the only way to Tim's version of heaven

* His heaven is a reward for being good; thus, he believes those of other "beliefs" (i.e. , cults and "good" atheists) will go to heaven if they do enough nice things on earth

* Tim says the Bible is only partially correct and God agrees with him when He is confused

* Says he "knows" all this because God has (directly?) told him so


In spite of all that, Tim hasn't specifically said but suggests he's Christian. He asks a lot of "Bible" questions worded to extract specific (and erroneous) answers but, troll like, he rarely answers his own leading questions. So, we are left to ask, is Tim honest with all the outrageously wrong things he has posted? Or, is he a secret Jehovah Witness? Or is he just another pot-stirring web troll? Who knows?! :)

Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus!

[DeputyDog25]

I haven’t followed him at all and I don’t normally quote and reply but just felt like I was led to respond. I will keep this individual in my prayers. Thanks very much for clarifying Tim’s point of view.

[mpescatori]

Hello all, this is Maurizio from Rome, Italy.

I just joined this Forum because I'm interested in reloading and adapting "cheap to shoot" cartridges to "expensive to shoot" rifles.
I browsed the Forum Index and found "The Chapel"... interesting, I told myself. So I browsed in it and found this thread.
Intresting… So allow me this post.

Being born Italian, I was born, baptized and raised a Roman Catholic...naturally!
Being close to 60... in my day and age, Sunday School was taken very seriously, and only Priests and/or Nuns were allowed to teach.
These days, with fewer and fewer Young men entering he Clergy, seculars often teach...which led me to be asked as well.

So I started reading the Bible a bit more in depth, and found a passage something which is often overlooked.
The Book of Josiah is never taught in Sunday School (this side of the Atlantic, anyway) because Teachers concentrate on Genesis, a bit of Exodus, and then rush to the Gospels.
And yet…

IIRC, it was during the rule of King Josiah that the ancient scrolls of "THE LAW" (Deuteronomy) were found in the foundations of the Temple which the King had ordered to renew and rebuild.
BUT nobody could understand that ancient Language, because during their stay in Babylon the People of Israel had forgotten "jewish".
So they called on "experts" (???) to decypher it.

And here lies problem one: the GEMATRIA of Genesis has been lost.
What is Gematria?
In ancient languages, there were no digits and numbers were represented by letters; Roman Numerals are a well known example, but Greeks and Israelites used the very same principle.
So, in Gematria, a word written in Hebrew has a Mathematical meaning, and often hides a different meaning because "those in the know" can equate a word to another word with the same numerical value.

Then there's problem two: LOST IN TRANSLATION: as time goes by, LANGUAGES CHANGE, and often feel the influence of other languages (remember the stay in Babylon? And what about the stay in Egypt?) to the point that some words or even idiomatic expressions are lost, or censured, or both.
Example: Ask a Rabbi who is fluent in ancient Hebrew to compare his Beresit to our Genesis, even in the Septuagint; he will immediately say there are differences.
And I'm not talking about "cats&dogs" differences, but those minute differences that will go unnoticed by the masses yet trigger the Inquisition.
Example: During Creation, Beresit mentions "The Elohim" as a plural entity of many (Hebrew, being a Semitic Language, has singular, dual and plural) yet the Septuagint and ALL Christian Bibles only refer to ONE God.
Example: During the wars by Abram, or the family feuds of Jacob and Esau, or Moses, or Joshua, the Hebrew and the Sseptuagint mention many "Elohim" different from YHWH, while contemporary Catholic and Pritestant Bibles only refer to "false gods"
Example: in Genesis, when Sodom is destroyed, Lot and family flee: Lot's wife turned into a pillar of salt… or simply froze in awe? Or justan idiomatic expression?
Example: Jesus feeds a moltitude with "two loaves and three fish": gentlemen, the Apostles were fishermen, and Jesus performed this miracle by the lakeside; how do we know it wasn't an idiomatic expression to indicate "we've got some plain food, but nothing fancy"? How do we know it wasn't a plain idiomatic expression?
OR when your wife says "it's raining cats&dogs" does she actually mean there are domestic pets cascading from the sky?

Then there's problem three: WRONG ASSUMPTIONS and I am not only referring to what I just mentioned above, but to the wrong identification of names to specific individuals or locations in history. The Pharaoh at the time of Moses was not Ramses but Shishak, for example; and Moses did not "lead the People of Israel" but only those, of any faith, who were willing to follow him out of Goshen. Evidence is that St.Joseph led baby Jesus and Mary to Egypt… not just across the Jordan to any other city, but along caravan routes back into [safe] Egypt, where there was a community of jews larger than Jerusalem itself.
Often we are led to believe "this or that" because it makes sense "today, in our society" yet we lack any decent knowledge of "then and there".

Then there's problem four: St.Paul and his Letters. Truly, if we read theGospels carefully (especially St.John's) and compare those teachings to St.Paul's letters,one is often led to ask "and where did he (Paul) get this idea from?" Starting with the "original sin"...

[mpescatori]

1st off, you have to remember that the Bible is one of the most heavily re-edited pieces of literature the world has ever known. King James was looking for a political screed to calm unruly subjects: you think the monks he hired to compile a new bible didn't know which side their bread was buttered on? The OT is pretty much all myth [those parts not devoted to record-keeping, like Deuteronomy's "begats"] to answer "where did we come from?" and provide cohesion to a semi-nomadic and frequently invaded culture. The New Testament is composed of individual gospels, and like any collection of eye-witness testimonies, most of one disagrees with another's. And let's not forget that a HUGE collection of gospels were knowingly excluded [look up the Council of Nicea somewhere in the 300s? iirc, & realize that anything that didn't support the official party line got written out of history in the interest of consolidating the nascent political hegemony of the Church...] And then of course, there's the little aspect that not *everyone* even agrees upon the divinity of the carpenter from Nazareth. So what *do* the major religions agree upon? Well, Jesus is a prophet nearly as important as their favorite misogynistic pederast to the Moslems, and when Zen Buddhists have been read the Christ's teachings they agree that he sounds like someone who has achieved satori [which is usually translated as "enlightenment."] I don't require divinity, nor do I have faith in pie in the sky in the sweet by & by: his teachings are a recipe for heaven on earth, not a ticket to some heaven we only get to see after our ticket gets punched. If more people who claim to believe in him actually lived the life he taught, there'd be a lot more people who'd listen to his message. Just sayin'.

Hi.

I had to repace my pages to find your post, and I have to say I agree 100%
King James willfully omitted the Books of Maccabees from the OT because they justify the people rising against an oppressive ruler.
According to Genesis, Israel and Ishmael both sons of Abraham, through their mothers Sara and Agar, and they both worship the same "God of Abraham"; what differs is the Revelaiton (by the Archangel Gabriel) and Christians worship the same "God of Abraham" so… you fill in the blank ________________________


Was Joseph a "poor carpenter"? Or was he a "nàggar" (Master Carpenter) and a very pious man?
Many ancient Kings were described as "poor and pious" but they were anything but POOR
Remember, the Archangel Gabriel visited Mary during Joseph's long stay away from home, not just an overnighter.
Joseph left when Mary was a virgin, he returned and she was 6 months pregnant.

Was Jesus from a village called Nazareth OR was he made to take Nazarene vows, jus like his cousin John the Baptist?
Because according to both Roman tax records and Jewish records "Nazareth" was a religious community in Jerusalem, not a village.

So why was Jesus from Nazareth, if he wasn't?
Because in Latin "Jesus the Nazarene" is "Jesus Nazarenus" and it's more convenient for the Christian Church (which wanted to detach itself from jewish clergy and control) to claim "Jesus from the village of…" instead of "Jesus the monk of…"

It's all written, you only have to understand what you read.

[1hole]

Hi. King James willfully omitted the Books of Maccabees from the OT because they justify the people rising against an oppressive ruler.

Not that it matters very much but ...

* King James omitted nothing. He was neither a translator nor theologian and he had no direct action in the Bible now carrying his name.

The KJV-Westminster translators took several existing English (partial) Bible translations and completed the work of such men as Wicklift and others. Then they translated from the RRC Latin "Vulgate" because that was all they had to work with. They followed the then existing Jewish (Christian) canon - which did not include the Jewish historical (not Holy Spirit inspired) books of the Maccabees.

The first church council was called to Nicea by Constantine in the early 300s primarily to establish the New Testament canon. They carefully examined many books. They retained what we now have and, for a variety of sound reasons, rejected all of the others. None of the choices were made for diabolical denominational (or political) considerations because at that time there were no denominations, including what finally became the Roman Church. Christians simply had no political power.

Hundreds of years later, the then well established Roman Catholic Church, for reasons of their own, began to add some of the previously discounted books. Now the question for Christianity becomes, "Why did Catholics do that?" I have some ideas of why but I have no proof and don't wish to stir up a hornet's nest about "hatred" with Roman Catholics so I keep my thoughts to myself and leave it up to others to answer as seems good to them.

[Rizzo]

Hello all, this is Maurizio from Rome, Italy.

Example: During Creation, Beresit mentions "The Elohim" as a plural entity of many (Hebrew, being a Semitic Language, has singular, dual and plural) yet the Septuagint and ALL Christian Bibles only refer to ONE God...

Hello Maurizio, welcome to the forum.

How many Gods are there?
Here are some passages from the Bible that suggests there are more than one:

(Genesis 1:26) - "Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness . . . .'"
(Genesis 3:22) - "And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil . . ."
(Genesis 11:7) - "Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

Kinda throws a monkey wrench in the mechanism of a single God thought doesn't it?
Yet, later in the Bible it states there is only one God.

(Deuteronomy 6:4) - "Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!"
(Isaiah 43:10) - ". . . Before Me [YHWH] there was no God formed, and there will be none after Me."
(Isaiah 44:6) - ". . . there is no God besides Me."
(Isaiah 44:8) - ". . . And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none."

Somewhat contradictory I would say.

[1hole]

....Kinda throws a monkey wrench in the mechanism of a single God thought doesn't it?
Yet, later in the Bible it states there is only one God.

(Deuteronomy 6:4) - "Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!"

The Christian concept of "one God existing in three persons (Father, Son and Holy Spirit)" is difficult for our simplistic human minds to wrap around. But, considered as it should be makes it easy to comprehend ... I think.

Think of God being a single "team" of three. Each is an eternal being, each is self existing, each being all knowing and all powerful. As a team they are so totally united in power, one heart and one goal they are ONE God.

When that old Hebrew prophet, "Deuteronome", wrote his book (6:4) and mentioned ONE God he referred to the spiritually united TEAM of three beings which constitute our one God (1 John 5:7). How and why they decided they would operate as a united team is above our pay grade, it's something we really don't need to know.

[RogerDat]

Perhaps the point isn't that one tries to determine which parts are factually correct, accurate, or antidotal but rather that one spend that time in considering what is the importance of this or that passage to my understanding of the guidance it provides.

I don't know if Job is a factual and accurate transcription of conversation between the devil and god, or the dialog between Job and others. What I do know is it is a very early introduction to the idea of bad things happening for reasons beyond our understanding, that these bad things can happen to good people for reasons other than as punishment from god for transgressions.

My own guess is the reason those passages of Job are part of the bible is because they introduce those concepts for our consideration and contemplation. Not to provide a factual reporting of conversations and events.

The earliest copies of the bible don't have the whole bit about "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" where it is found in later versions however it is there now and can provide valuable instruction to living ones faith. Accurate? Not accurate? Both not as relevant to my way of thinking as is it an important idea for mankind to know.

[Ickisrulz]

Hello Maurizio, welcome to the forum.

How many Gods are there?
Here are some passages from the Bible that suggests there are more than one:

(Genesis 1:26) - "Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness . . . .'"
(Genesis 3:22) - "And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil . . ."
(Genesis 11:7) - "Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

Kinda throws a monkey wrench in the mechanism of a single God thought doesn't it?
Yet, later in the Bible it states there is only one God.

(Deuteronomy 6:4) - "Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one!"
(Isaiah 43:10) - ". . . Before Me [YHWH] there was no God formed, and there will be none after Me."
(Isaiah 44:6) - ". . . there is no God besides Me."
(Isaiah 44:8) - ". . . And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, or is there any other Rock? I know of none."

Somewhat contradictory I would say.

The Bible's progressive revelation shows that three people make up God. Each has a different role and relationship to the others. Each person has all the attributes of God, but is a separate individual.

This is a pretty simple concept that gets confused by our use of the word "God." Normally when a person says God, they are referring the God the Father. But in the Bible this is not always the case. "God" is used to refer to any individual in the Trinity or all three at once (a.k.a, the Godhead).

The Bible does not say that God is singular in person. It actually says the opposite as you have pointed out. The biblical proclamation that God is "one" was made in direct contrast to the gods of the heathens. These people had a god for war, a god for rain, a god for fertility, etc. The heathen gods also worked against one another. The God of the Bible controls all things and is singular in purpose. There is no disagreement in the Godhead: "God is one."

[mpescatori]

This is a pretty simple concept that gets confused by our use of the word "God." Normally when a person says God, they are referring the God the Father. But in the Bible this is not always the case. "God" is used to refer to any individual in the Trinity or all three at once (a.k.a, the Godhead).

There is (not) only YHWH in the Old Testament. Indeed, Genesis and Deuteronomy as a whole are witness to the many Elohim who lived and governed, each their own people.
If you get an old (i.e. before WW2) Bible, Genesis alone will mention Elohim, El Shaddai, YHWH, but also the Elohim which were worshipped in cities like Salem or Gomorrah.
Indeed… Melkizedek, Priest-King of Salem, worshipped El Shaddai, and Elohei who is not YHWH; another example, Genesis 31:53:
"53 The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor [Elohei Nahor], the God of their father, judge between us."
So we have YHWH, who is "the one and only real God", coming to terms with a false idol over a truce between Isaac and his father-in-law Laban, son of Nahor.
OR
Abraham and his kind served YHWH, and Nahor and his kind served another Elohei.


The Bible does not say that God is singular in person. It actually says the opposite as you have pointed out. The biblical proclamation that God is "one" was made in direct contrast to the gods of the heathens. These people had a god for war, a god for rain, a god for fertility, etc. The heathen gods also worked against one another.
Quite the contrary. YHWH is a god of war. He appears to Abraham in Gen.12, and rather than giving him a land to call his own, leads him to a steppe (semi-humid desert) where he and his kind are destined to a life of nomadism, having to flee to Egypt at least twice because of drought and famine, once when Abram isyoung, once when Jacob is old and Joseph is Governonr of Goshen. So how could the Creator of Heaven and Earth lead a man to the "Promised Land" and not even have control over the weather?
OR
YHWH is a god of war, and can only keep his promise through war.
See Genesis, Exodus, Joshua, but also Samuel and Kings.
Not once did he send an angel or appear in a dream to convince "the other guy" that "his guy" was a better option; no, he waged war and ethnic cleansing.


The God of the Bible controls all things and is singular in purpose. There is no disagreement in the Godhead: "God is one."
Again:
1- (many) Elohim contribute to Creation (although the original Hebrew for "Create" barà means "shape" or "mould", there is no such concept nor word in Hebrew to indicate "create out of nothing")
2- El Shaddai "The Most High" is "the ruler of all Elohim" from Creation down to Melkizedech;
3- Genesis concentrates on YHWH, and the other Elohim, although sometimes mentioned, are gradually censored not by the Jews nor by the Septuagint, but by the catholic copyists of early Christianity
4- What are generally taught to be "false gods" were actually the names of the other Elohim as found in Canaanite, Egyptian, Sumerian or Babylonian religious literature; indeed, there is a stelae (stone pillar with inscription) in Lebanon, written in Phoenician, which reads "Ashteroth greets YHWH and his Asherah", which means a number of things:
a. That was the "religious boundary" where the Priests of one would give way to the Priests of the other,
b. the two peoples acknowledged the existence of both Ashteroth and YHWH ,
c. YHWH had a "mate" or female peer known as Asherah.
Note: this is not heretical: in ancient times ALL gods formed amale+female couple, where to each his/her own temples, priests and responsibilities
Note: this may be the explanation why wise King Solomon allowed fr the creation of chapels to Ashteroth , Asherah and other female deities in the copurtyard of the Temple.

As for the Trinity:
1. God is the Father, OK
2. Jesus is the Son, OK
… mumble mumble … please, where is the feminine component in the Trinity?
Because if you read carefully and annotate with the attention of a Lt. Colombo… you'll notice that what "the Angel of the Lord" did in the Old Testament, generally ArchAngel Gabriel (up to and including Announciation) is then carried out by a difficult to fathom "Holy Spirit" or "Holy Ghost" (i.e. Pentecost).
...mumble mumble…
So either the Holy Ghost is actually the ArchAngel Gabriel,
OR
the Holy Ghost is actually Asherah.

Kinda shocking, if you give it a thought...

[Ickisrulz]

There is (not) only YHWH in the Old Testament. Indeed, Genesis and Deuteronomy as a whole are witness to the many Elohim who lived and governed, each their own people.
If you get an old (i.e. before WW2) Bible, Genesis alone will mention Elohim, El Shaddai, YHWH, but also the Elohim which were worshipped in cities like Salem or Gomorrah.
Indeed… Melkizedek, Priest-King of Salem, worshipped El Shaddai, and Elohei who is not YHWH; another example, Genesis 31:53:
"53 The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor [Elohei Nahor], the God of their father, judge between us."
So we have YHWH, who is "the one and only real God", coming to terms with a false idol over a truce between Isaac and his father-in-law Laban, son of Nahor.
OR
Abraham and his kind served YHWH, and Nahor and his kind served another Elohei.


Quite the contrary. YHWH is a god of war. He appears to Abraham in Gen.12, and rather than giving him a land to call his own, leads him to a steppe (semi-humid desert) where he and his kind are destined to a life of nomadism, having to flee to Egypt at least twice because of drought and famine, once when Abram isyoung, once when Jacob is old and Joseph is Governonr of Goshen. So how could the Creator of Heaven and Earth lead a man to the "Promised Land" and not even have control over the weather?
OR
YHWH is a god of war, and can only keep his promise through war.
See Genesis, Exodus, Joshua, but also Samuel and Kings.
Not once did he send an angel or appear in a dream to convince "the other guy" that "his guy" was a better option; no, he waged war and ethnic cleansing.


Again:
1- (many) Elohim contribute to Creation (although the original Hebrew for "Create" barà means "shape" or "mould", there is no such concept nor word in Hebrew to indicate "create out of nothing")
2- El Shaddai "The Most High" is "the ruler of all Elohim" from Creation down to Melkizedech;
3- Genesis concentrates on YHWH, and the other Elohim, although sometimes mentioned, are gradually censored not by the Jews nor by the Septuagint, but by the catholic copyists of early Christianity
4- What are generally taught to be "false gods" were actually the names of the other Elohim as found in Canaanite, Egyptian, Sumerian or Babylonian religious literature; indeed, there is a stelae (stone pillar with inscription) in Lebanon, written in Phoenician, which reads "Ashteroth greets YHWH and his Asherah", which means a number of things:
a. That was the "religious boundary" where the Priests of one would give way to the Priests of the other,
b. the two peoples acknowledged the existence of both Ashteroth and YHWH ,
c. YHWH had a "mate" or female peer known as Asherah.
Note: this is not heretical: in ancient times ALL gods formed amale+female couple, where to each his/her own temples, priests and responsibilities
Note: this may be the explanation why wise King Solomon allowed fr the creation of chapels to Ashteroth , Asherah and other female deities in the copurtyard of the Temple.

As for the Trinity:
1. God is the Father, OK
2. Jesus is the Son, OK
… mumble mumble … please, where is the feminine component in the Trinity?
Because if you read carefully and annotate with the attention of a Lt. Colombo… you'll notice that what "the Angel of the Lord" did in the Old Testament, generally ArchAngel Gabriel (up to and including Announciation) is then carried out by a difficult to fathom "Holy Spirit" or "Holy Ghost" (i.e. Pentecost).
...mumble mumble…
So either the Holy Ghost is actually the ArchAngel Gabriel,
OR
the Holy Ghost is actually Asherah.

Kinda shocking, if you give it a thought...

I have read your posts. The ideas within them are those of secular Bible scholars (i.e., unbelievers) and are so at odds with any Christian or Jewish theology they don't warrant a dialog on this forum; by me anyway.

And yes, there are counterpoints and answers to each issue you posted above. I am sure you know that and what they are. But I doubt that matters to you. Are you here to entertain yourself and undermine the faith of others'?

This section of the forum is supposed to be an extension of the Chapel but has been almost taken over in the last few months by scoffers with axes to grind.

[dtknowles]

Deputy, if I may ....

Don't know how long you've followed Tim's posts but he is quite odd for someone professing to be a Christian.

To honestly (I think) paraphrase Tim (for brevity), at various times he has told us:

* Says God is not all knowing, not all powerful and lives in a constant struggle with Satan

* Says man is in control of human history, not God

* Faith in Jesus as savior is NOT the only way to Tim's version of heaven

* His heaven is a reward for being good; thus, he believes those of other "beliefs" (i.e. , cults and "good" atheists) will go to heaven if they do enough nice things on earth

* Tim says the Bible is only partially correct and God agrees with him when He is confused

* Says he "knows" all this because God has (directly?) told him so


In spite of all that, Tim hasn't specifically said but suggests he's Christian. He asks a lot of "Bible" questions worded to extract specific (and erroneous) answers but, troll like, he rarely answers his own leading questions. So, we are left to ask, is Tim honest with all the outrageously wrong things he has posted? Or, is he a secret Jehovah Witness? Or is he just another pot-stirring web troll? Who knows?! :)

Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus!

How could you imagine I am a Christian. While I respect Jesus as a great teacher and martyr I do not believe he is God and our Lord and Savior. I have said that may times in many posts.

I am not a Jehovah Witness and I do not belong to any Chruch and I do not follow any religion. I think no more than 8 of the ten commandments are correct. I believe that there is but one God, the creator of the heavens including the Earth. Philosophically I am probably closest to Theists. I am not a Deist because I will not rule out God acting in the present. Being a Theist really only means I believe in God.

Tim

[1hole]

How could you imagine I am a Christian. While I respect Jesus as a great teacher and martyr I do not believe he is God and our Lord and Savior. I have said that may times in many posts.

Seems I owe a couple of apologies.

First, sorry that I offended you in my thought you might be some sort of Christian. But, I haven't read many of your posts and, since you have made several references to scripture, I felt you might, at some level, consider yourself a Christian and gave you the benefit of any doubt; that was obviously a mistake. I was wrong and accept your correction, I apologise and withdraw the suggestion.

Several of your stated beliefs are straight out of J.W. pamphlets. I also apologise to them for thinking you might be one.


... I think no more than 8 of the ten commandments are correct.

What? ! YOU THINK "no more than 8 of the Ten Commandments are correct"? Goodness, what a THINKer! I won't ask which you THINK may be right or why/how you came to your strange conclusions.

I will close by saying your half-good perception of Jesus is not unique but the only way you could possibly be right is either he was a highly skilled mad-man or the world's most successful liar; neither is good. Maybe you should do a bit more thinking?

[mpescatori]

I have read your posts. The ideas within them are those of secular Bible scholars (i.e., unbelievers) and are so at odds with any Christian or Jewish theology they don't warrant a dialog on this forum; by me anyway.

And yes, there are counterpoints and answers to each issue you posted above. I am sure you know that and what they are. But I doubt that matters to you. Are you here to entertain yourself and undermine the faith of others'?

This section of the forum is supposed to be an extension of the Chapel but has been almost taken over in the last few months by scoffers with axes to grind.

I have no axe, no grinder, and speak in low and soft tones.

I believe that if one puts everything in the hands of "Faith", he/she is the prime target of television/circus preachers.

Knowing the facts, remembering what was on page 17 when you are at page 43 means you cannot be taken by the hand and walked around like a toddler - quite the contrary.

How many times did the Pharisees try to put Jesus and the Apostles in difficulty with awkward questions? How was the answer? It was Always a learned answer, never a "have faith".

Off the cuff, how many animals did Noah lead into the Ark, without having to look it up?

[a danl]

I have no axe, no grinder, and speak in low and soft tones.

I believe that if one puts everything in the hands of "Faith", he/she is the prime target of television/circus preachers.

Knowing the facts, remembering what was on page 17 when you are at page 43 means you cannot be taken by the hand and walked around like a toddler - quite the contrary.

How many times did the Pharisees try to put Jesus and the Apostles in difficulty with awkward questions? How was the answer? It was Always a learned answer, never a "have faith".

Off the cuff, how many animals did Noah lead into the Ark, without having to look it up?

noah did not lead any animals to or on the ark, God brought them

[Blackwater]

It is amazing to me how some folks twist and contort their thinking in order to believe that Christ was NOT the savior, whom He claimed to be. It's also amazing how some folks twist and contort the scriptures to conform to their concepts and ideas, rather than merely taking His words at face value. If He is indeed the Son of God, as He claimed, then he would NEVER - never Never NEVER! - deliberately try to confuse us, or hide His true manings. A loving and caring God would set forth His words in as straight and understandable a manner as possible, wouldn't he? And yet, how often we hear of folks trying to interpret His words in a manner so as to create confusion and doubt. And mostly, all because they can't or won't accept the simple veracity of His words! What a willful and insolent lot we can be sometimes!!!

90+% of His words are very simple and straightforward. It's our wills that are crooked and twisted - NOT His words! Wouldn't a good and benevolent God put forth His words in a manner that even those who are not mental giants could understand. How else could He do that other than to speak plainly, simply and directly to the issues of concern to him?

We so often overthink the scriptures! It just seems to be part of our natural psyches. But it's not a functional part of our minds. Evil indeed DOES exist in this world, and it can take many forms. Anything that detracts or diminishes the good within us is, by definition, evil. It doesn't matter how much we might love it, and want it to continue. All that matters is what things ARE, in reality. Our imaginations CAN get us in a lot of trouble, some of it that we can never get out of. The wise are very circumspect about these matters. The foolish ..... well, they do what the foolish have always done. God bless us all, and God bless the USA.

[1hole]

Amen.

[Rizzo]

It is amazing to me how some folks twist and contort their thinking in order to believe that Christ was NOT the savior, whom He claimed to be. It's also amazing how some folks twist and contort the scriptures to conform to their concepts and ideas, rather than merely taking His words at face value. If He is indeed the Son of God, as He claimed, then he would NEVER - never Never NEVER! - deliberately try to confuse us, or hide His true manings. A loving and caring God would set forth His words in as straight and understandable a manner as possible, wouldn't he? And yet, how often we hear of folks trying to interpret His words in a manner so as to create confusion and doubt. And mostly, all because they can't or won't accept the simple veracity of His words! What a willful and insolent lot we can be sometimes!!!

90+% of His words are very simple and straightforward. It's our wills that are crooked and twisted - NOT His words! Wouldn't a good and benevolent God put forth His words in a manner that even those who are not mental giants could understand. How else could He do that other than to speak plainly, simply and directly to the issues of concern to him?

We so often overthink the scriptures! It just seems to be part of our natural psyches. But it's not a functional part of our minds. Evil indeed DOES exist in this world, and it can take many forms. Anything that detracts or diminishes the good within us is, by definition, evil. It doesn't matter how much we might love it, and want it to continue. All that matters is what things ARE, in reality. Our imaginations CAN get us in a lot of trouble, some of it that we can never get out of. The wise are very circumspect about these matters. The foolish ..... well, they do what the foolish have always done. God bless us all, and God bless the USA.

What you say makes sense to me, but, in my mind, it's not that simple.
Good luck to the truth seeker who reads the Bible to find out the "meaning of life' and what God is all about.

Taking the literal word from the Bible can create confusion to the new seeker.
For example: "Thou shalt not kill"
Well, that's pretty straightforward. One could take the literal words and be very confused.
I think we all pretty much understand the meaning of that to be Thou shalt not murder.

That's just one example. The Bible has passages that are confusing unfortunately.
Even the apostles did not understand what Jesus was saying in some cases.
What is written and what it means can be two different things.

For better understanding about what the Bible says and what it means has sparked all kinds of books to be written and Bible Study classes to be given for those who are searching for a better understanding.

[6bg6ga]

How could you imagine I am a Christian. While I respect Jesus as a great teacher and martyr I do not believe he is God and our Lord and Savior. I have said that may times in many posts.

I am not a Jehovah Witness and I do not belong to any Chruch and I do not follow any religion. I think no more than 8 of the ten commandments are correct. I believe that there is but one God, the creator of the heavens including the Earth. Philosophically I am probably closest to Theists. I am not a Deist because I will not rule out God acting in the present. Being a Theist really only means I believe in God.

Tim

I can also relate to a lot of what you have said. I believe in a creator a supreme being. I am quite bewildered by the bible. To me not a lot of it makes sense. It can be interpreted different ways again my opinion. Another thing... a lot of churches have started simply because people didn't like what was being taught. There are a few religions that are a result of a split off from the Catholic church. Lutheran is one of them and probably the Church of England another. It would seem that when we don't wish to believe what is being taught someone starts yet another church. Ever notice how every single denomination says "They are the One True Church?" Like I have mentioned before on this forum I was raised Catholic and I guess you would say lost my faith. Recently before we moved I was going to a Christian church. When I got into a conversation with a paster at a Baptist church I was told the Christian church wasn't correct and I was making a mistake by going there. I marvel at some of you with unquestioning faith. I guess I am more scientific and need more proof call it lack of faith. My whole life religion has been centered around the almighty dollar. You gotta give that 10% off the top now. I'm sorry but there is so much that is illogical in my mind about the Bible. As I look at religion as a whole I ask myself if it is no more than a means to control behavior. Makes sense to me. Put the fear of a place called hell in someones mind and most will behave correctly.

[a danl]

How could you imagine I am a Christian. While I respect Jesus as a great teacher and martyr I do not believe he is God and our Lord and Savior. I have said that may times in many posts.

I am not a Jehovah Witness and I do not belong to any Chruch and I do not follow any religion. I think no more than 8 of the ten commandments are correct. I believe that there is but one God, the creator of the heavens including the Earth. Philosophically I am probably closest to Theists. I am not a Deist because I will not rule out God acting in the present. Being a Theist really only means I believe in God.

Tim

2 thessalonians chapter 2 verses 9 thru 12."the coming of the lawless one is by the activity of satan with all power and false signs and wonders,and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing , because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. therefore God sends them a strong delusion , so that they may believe what is false, in order that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness .
'

[1hole]

The RCC corrupts the word "church". The "church" is the people, the body of Christ, meaning all believers of all ages and without regard to to any self-righteous denomination's leadership. The meeting house is just a place where the true church comes to study and give thanks. No denomination is "the True Church".

People don't walk away from a group they love just to hear things that tickle their ears, good people leave to escape when the present leadership is corrupting scripture (as the United Methodists are doing now). It takes a longish period of time for walk-a-way congregations to organise scattered congregations into a new denomination.

Would you expect anyone to have loyalty to what they thought was the "second or third best true church?" I only know of ONE denomination, and a few cults, that routinely and loudly crowns themselves with that label ... and you started out in it! ??

When self-willed and unaccountable denominational leaders choose to initiate man-made worship and add power-grabbing "traditions" do you not think it is a good thing to seperate? I mean, when orthodox Christians walk away and begin a new association that actually follows scripture as best they understand it, isn't that good?

[quote]Like I have mentioned before on this forum I was raised Catholic and I guess you would say lost my faith.

I can appreciate that; in your shoes, I would too. However, my faith is in God, not some sign above the door. Some church folk have disappointed me from time to time but Good has not.


Recently before we moved I was going to a Christian church. When I got into a conversation with a paster at a Baptist church I was told the Christian church wasn't correct and I was making a mistake by going there.

In detail, the pastor is correct. Ditto Baptist; Methodist; Presbyterian. etc. We all do our best, but none of us are every going to be flawless in this life so it follows that our denominations can't possibly be flawless. So, imperfect us must choose the teachings that seem most important to us and find a denomination that comes closest to what we believe and, in love, accept their flaws as they must, in love, accept ours ... or live alone on a spiritually deserted island.


I marvel at some of you with unquestioning faith. I guess I am more scientific and need more proof call it lack of faith.

Why do you think our faith is "unquestioning"; most of us have a long list of questions! But, we're smart enough to know (1) He's God, we're not, and God doesn't owe us any explanations passed scripture. Then, (2) we usually have sufficient truth of personal life experiences of His faithfulness and believe He will remain true to the end. Few of us have any meaningful questions after that. (I wonder, do you believe you're more "scientific" than the committed Christian scientist Issac Newton?)


My whole life religion has been centered around the almighty dollar. You gotta give that 10% off the top now.

You need a "new religion"; suggest you try real Christianity.


Put the fear of a place called hell in someones mind and most will behave correctly.

It's hard to get folks who don't believe in God to be much concerned about any hell. And, even if they tried, they still wouldn't behave correctly!

We all live what we believe. No one can live any other way for more than a few minutes. But truly believing/trusting in God will make us "new creatures in Christ"; not yet perfect but we simply can't be born again in Him and still live a life of sin without care.

You background seems focused on "good works" to gain God's favor (i.e, God's "grace") but, IMHO, that hopelessly puts the cart before the horse. A life of good works only counts for Christians. No amount of good works will gain anything spiritual for a religious pretender.

Faith and trust in Christ Jesus - alone - is the core of Christian teaching; not a denomination; not money; not good works; not faithfully jumping thru special religious hoops; not water baptisms by any form; not mumbling repetitious chants; not sending in 10%; not ... etc.!

If you find a new congregation with nice people but their doctrines teach anything like that you're not there yet, move on.

[djryan13]

Many parts of the Old Testament are based on stories from even more ancient cultures. The Jews just rewrote a lot of it (including the part about Adam and Eve). I just can’t believe people would believe in any part of that nonsense. There are many other ancient texts about gods and deities. Why not believe those too? Some dead guy put a particular grouping of stories in a book and you believe it without any proof?

This is just my opinion. I don’t personally care what you do with your life as long as you don’t push your crazy beliefs on me. Freedom of OR from Religion.

I should add I typically stay out of Religious discussions but OP wanted opinions and I was bored.

[exile]

Many parts of the Old Testament are based on stories from even more ancient cultures. The Jews just rewrote a lot of it (including the part about Adam and Eve). I just can’t believe people would believe in any part of that nonsense. There are many other ancient texts about gods and deities. Why not believe those too? Some dead guy put a particular grouping of stories in a book and you believe it without any proof?

This is just my opinion. I don’t personally care what you do with your life as long as you don’t push your crazy beliefs on me. Freedom of OR from Religion.

I should add I typically stay out of Religious discussions but OP wanted opinions and I was bored.

Bored? Me too. It is true that Christians live by faith, but that does not mean there is not evidence for our faith.

Take a look at "Every Prophecy of the Bible" by John Walvoord. Six thousand years of fulfilled prophecy is hard to argue with, at least in my opinion.

exile

[djryan13]

Nah.. people just look for patterns. It’s instinct. You can call it prophecy all you want but I will never believe it. I once told my best friend in high school that he should go see a doctor cause he probably has a tumor when he told me his back was hurting. He died of cancer in the spine within 8 months. True story. Did I have some mystical premonition or was it coincidence?



Bored? Me too. It is true that Christians live by faith, but that does not mean there is not evidence for our faith.

Take a look at "Every Prophecy of the Bible" by John Walvoord. Six thousand years of fulfilled prophecy is hard to argue with, at least in my opinion.

exile

[bmortell]

spent over an hour trying to think of anything productive, but the only thing i can think of is people believing things that are unfalsifiable is a logical dead end.

[snowwolfe]

spent over an hour trying to think of anything productive, but the only thing i can think of is people believing things that are unfalsifiable is a logical dead end.

Very true. Just because something is written is no basis for its truth.

[6bg6ga]

Correct me if I am wrong here but weren't there some books left out of the bible? If so then why? The bible is supposed to be written using divine intervention and if that is the case why wasn't everything included in the bible? As much as I would like to believe things were written down word for word ask yourself this.. If you were to tell a story on one side of a room filled with people what are the chances of it coming back to you 100% as you told it? Not a very good chance and this has been proven. So, maybe God did guide the writers in their various books in the bible that doesn't entirely rule out the probability of a little free hand in what was being written down.

Contradictions.. God made Adam and Eve and they had sons Cain and Able. Cain killed Abel and was cast out. Cain wondered and met other people. Where did these people come from? I am told Adam and Eve had thousands of children and this is impossible and illogical unless Adam and Eve were super human God like creatures with a fife span of thousands of years.

[bmortell]

doesn't matter what you bring up because saying god made it happen like that is always just as valid as a claim as saying he exists in the first place. its a logical checkmate where you can never move.

I think the main problem is if all something needs to be true is belief and faith then how do you differentiate between different claims, beliefs and religions. they are all equal claims if evidence and proof isn't needed to be true. then you have a mess and everyone is right and questions have many answers.
second option would be belief don't matter and only proof can confirm something true, in which case science wins hands down.
third option would be one of the beliefs is correct, but you cant tell which one is correct because none of them require proof, only belief, which basically everyone on earth believes in what there doing or else you'd kind of have to redefine terms. so if you were born in the right time in history and the right spot and right family, you might get the right one out of the infinite number of beliefs and 99% of the reason you got the right one is randomness.

[roadie]

I believe the entirety of religion began with some clan of loons in the middle of some nowhere, god forsaken place, and spread throughout the world. All religion is fear based and reward based, doesn't matter which one you pick, all the same.You follow the teachings, or you burn in some nasty environment for eternity.....that's a long time. Follow the teachings, and you get to live in some "heavenly" place, where you get to fish all day. Islam gives you a bunch of virgins to deflower.......don't ask what you do after going through them all, but there's probably an easy button for that too. No idea what the others give you, nor do I care.

Every Christian religion has it's own take on what the bible really means, and any books that didn't match what the writers of the bible thought were tossed aside, can't have that kind of heresy anywhere near the real truth of the bible. Consider too, that some authors were being pursued by people looking to run spears up their you know whats, while living in a sandbox and quite possibly under the influence of cannabis, or other flavor of the day dope. That has to have some effect on a persons mind, might even cause some wild, fanciful, stories to come forth. I'm pretty sure there are people on this thread who would very much welcome the opportunity to rewrite the bible.....just to explain what it "really" means, help out their fellow man and all.

The bible and religion has been the catalyst, the justification, of slaughtering millions upon millions of people, their crime was in not believing the same religion that their butchers did. It goes on today, the Vatican being not quite the pillar of society it would like people to think it is. Then you got Islam, knocking off anyone who doesn't conform. I have no idea what any of the other religions do, I'm sure they're probably rather drastic about it too.

All religions tend to foster an environment of fanatics, you're either in, or you're out. Religion is about control of the masses through fear, the bible is just the main weapon used to gain that control in society. Also, someone's gotta pay the electric bill for all the fancy glass churches and keep the above reproach leaders fat and happy. It was the same when the bible was put together, it'll be the same till this Earth is wiped out by some rock hitting it.....if we don't do ourselves in before that.

[a danl]

it's really sad to find so many people that are willing to die on their own merits and suffer the penalty of their unbelief. they will not out argue God in the end.

[bmortell]

Same could happen to you since your gambling on one particular religion being right out of countless many. I dont think the odds of picking the right one is any higher than all of them being a test of exclusion rather than inclusion since thats also a possibility

[superc]

Abraham's parents were refugees (displaced persons) who left Sumeria for Mesopotamia when the ice walls melted and a great flood resulted. Obviously he grew up learning lore and tales from his parents and other displaced persons. Many of the Old Testament Genesis stories (as well as the portion dealing with the early part of Moses' life are slightly distorted (manes changed, etc.) versions of much older pre-Hebrew tales found on clay tablets unearthed in Sumeria. Later of course they were transplanted by Constantine's lackeys into what became the Christian Bible. I suspect there was some basis for the old Sumerian tales, but what it was, how much was embellishment or distortion before our race developed a written language, we will never truly know.

[6bg6ga]

It is amazing to me how some folks twist and contort their thinking in order to believe that Christ was NOT the savior, whom He claimed to be. It's also amazing how some folks twist and contort the scriptures to conform to their concepts and ideas, rather than merely taking His words at face value. If He is indeed the Son of God, as He claimed, then he would NEVER - never Never NEVER! - deliberately try to confuse us, or hide His true manings. A loving and caring God would set forth His words in as straight and understandable a manner as possible, wouldn't he? And yet, how often we hear of folks trying to interpret His words in a manner so as to create confusion and doubt. And mostly, all because they can't or won't accept the simple veracity of His words! What a willful and insolent lot we can be sometimes!!!

90+% of His words are very simple and straightforward. It's our wills that are crooked and twisted - NOT His words! Wouldn't a good and benevolent God put forth His words in a manner that even those who are not mental giants could understand. How else could He do that other than to speak plainly, simply and directly to the issues of concern to him?

We so often overthink the scriptures! It just seems to be part of our natural psyches. But it's not a functional part of our minds. Evil indeed DOES exist in this world, and it can take many forms. Anything that detracts or diminishes the good within us is, by definition, evil. It doesn't matter how much we might love it, and want it to continue. All that matters is what things ARE, in reality. Our imaginations CAN get us in a lot of trouble, some of it that we can never get out of. The wise are very circumspect about these matters. The foolish ..... well, they do what the foolish have always done. God bless us all, and God bless the USA.

Sir I'm sure your a believer. The rest of us the "Black Sheep" so to speak are having some problems. Some can blindly go along and picture the cartoon of sheep or another animal going over a cliff and the ones behind the lead sheep simply following along. Myself 'm having a hard time without being labeled as someone that twists and or distorts things in order to believe Christ wasn't my savior. I have a hard time with scriptures that frankly don't make a lot of sense to me. Some of this reminds me of my systematic brainwashing when I was young going to a Catholic grade school. We had to memorize a lot of stuff and in a manor its exactly parallel to brain washing. You do this by repetition you repeat the phrase over and over until you have it memorized.

‘A Catechism of Christian Doctrine’ – often called ‘The Penny Catechism’ tells us ‘a sacrament is an outward sign of
inward grace, ordained by Jesus Christ, by which grace is given to our souls.’

"90+% of His words are very simple and straightforward. It's our wills that are crooked and twisted - NOT His words! Wouldn't a good and benevolent God put forth His words in a manner that even those who are not mental giants could understand. How else could He do that other than to speak plainly, simply and directly to the issues of concern to him?"

To me it doesn't sound straightforward and simple to understand.

Every time someone like myself questions the Bible and religion then the EVIL card is played just like the Catholics play the guilt card. I've even heard a minister say that EVIL was the cause of him falling on an icy sidewalk and dislocating his shoulder. I'm not of the Devils side (If he even exists) nor on Evils side. I blame the minister for not being careful. You take a person that robs a bank for example....did the Devil make him do it? I think not. Is the person evil? Probably. Is the person just plain stupid? Most certainly.

Going back to "how some folks twist and contort their thinking " ever think about how your church go started? Is there a possibility that your particular church got started because someone didn't like another preaching? I've mentioned the Lutheran religion along with the Church of England as being offshoots of the Catholic church. You can probably add a lot more churches to that list.

You talk about the scripture as being "correct" yet so much is illogical. How are you going to turn water into wine? Feed thousands with a 1/2 dozen fish? As much as I would really love to believe all of that its illogical.

So what it really boils down to my opinion here.... If you follow the wrong religion your going to hell. Sin and your going to hell. Don't go to church and your going to hell. Be a native in the middle of Africa totally untouched by religion and your going to hell.

[a danl]

Same could happen to you since your gambling on one particular religion being right out of countless many. I dont think the odds of picking the right one is any higher than all of them being a test of exclusion rather than inclusion since thats also a possibility

my God died for my sins and has risen from the grave and . all other "god's" are still in their graves. or some kind of idol that has eyes and cannot see or ears that cannot hear or mouths that cannot speak.

[a danl]

Very true. Just because something is written is no basis for its truth.

well, one could look at it this way "some things are true whether you believe it or not"

[dangitgriff]

I believe in God and Bigfoot. 🦧
Maybe aliens. [emoji89]
(Can I get an A-men?)
[emoji1783]

[6bg6ga]

well, one could look at it this way "some things are true whether you believe it or not"

There are religions that believe that you get for example 74 virgins if you martyr yourself. Is that true simply because its written? Is it true because you wish to blindly follow? Lets look at this closely... due to the fact there is promiscuity the likely hood of finding 74 virgins for lets say 1000 people is going to be slim to none. They martyr themselves because they are told to they will evidentially go to a promised land even tho they kill others in the process of killing themselves. Yet it is written ah the power of the written word don't question it but believe entirely in it.

You believe in bigfoot? Seems to be some evidence to support it. I haven't personally seen one nor have a seen any physical evidence to support one yet people believe. Aliens..... yet another wonderful topic. Ever watch the history channel ? The documentary's they have on ancient Egypt the pyramids? Seems to be some cutting evidence there on aliens life forms having constructed the pyramids via other technology. Appears to have been done prior to the great flood. Someone else here on Earth prior to Christ? A lot to think about some of it brings about doubt about what we have been taught or maybe better yet brainwashed.

[1hole]

My contaminated brain has been washed as white as snow in the blood of Christ, leaving me a new creature in Him. For that I'm eternally grateful.

[1hole]

You believe in bigfoot? Seems to be some evidence to support it. I haven't personally seen one nor have a seen any physical evidence to support one yet people believe.

Do signs matter to you? They do to me!

I once had a 10 acre piece of partial bottom land with a small stream running through it. I lived there for 25 years. There was a game trail in the thick brush along side the stream. The stream had what looked like a couple of beaver dams. I often saw deer tracks in the trail and an occasional rub. In the 25 years I lived there I never saw a single deer or beaver but, by the signs I did see, I'm certain there was a few of each.

I'm almost 80 and have been a Christian since age 16. I've seen a lot but I've never seen God. However, I've seen the certain signs of His guidance and care in my life and the lives of many others so I'm certain He was there for all of us and He still is. I've already seen a lot of life and I'm still looking!

My eyes are not as good as they used to be but I'm not blind to all that's happening to me and around me; "I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able ...."(II Tim 1:12-14). So, perhaps as you can see, it really doesn't matter to me what anyone else "thinks" or "believes" about God, or why.

Signs do matter. Thus, from the signs I could easily see, I know I once had deer and beaver on my land and God is still in my life.

[a danl]

There are religions that believe that you get for example 74 virgins if you martyr yourself. Is that true simply because its written? Is it true because you wish to blindly follow? Lets look at this closely... due to the fact there is promiscuity the likely hood of finding 74 virgins for lets say 1000 people is going to be slim to none. They martyr themselves because they are told to they will evidentially go to a promised land even tho they kill others in the process of killing themselves. Yet it is written ah the power of the written word don't question it but believe entirely in it.

You believe in bigfoot? Seems to be some evidence to support it. I haven't personally seen one nor have a seen any physical evidence to support one yet people believe. Aliens..... yet another wonderful topic. Ever watch the history channel ? The documentary's they have on ancient Egypt the pyramids? Seems to be some cutting evidence there on aliens life forms having constructed the pyramids via other technology. Appears to have been done prior to the great flood. Someone else here on Earth prior to Christ? A lot to think about some of it brings about doubt about what we have been taught or maybe better yet brainwashed.

i said "some things" , i didn't say all things. did you ever ask yourself about the so-called 74 virgins and wonder where they supposedly came from and how they got there?

[a danl]

Do signs matter to you? They do to me!

I once had a 10 acre piece of partial bottom land with a small stream running through it. I lived there for 25 years. There was a game trail in the thick brush along side the stream. The stream had what looked like a couple of beaver dams. I often saw deer tracks in the trail and an occasional rub. In the 25 years I lived there I never saw a single deer or beaver but, by the signs I did see, I'm certain there was a few of each.

I'm almost 80 and have been a Christian since age 16. I've seen a lot but I've never seen God. However, I've seen the certain signs of His guidance and care in my life and the lives of many others so I'm certain He was there for all of us and He still is. I've already seen a lot of life and I'm still looking!

My eyes are not as good as they used to be but I'm not blind to all that's happening to me and around me; "I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able ...."(II Tim 1:12-14). So, perhaps as you can see, it really doesn't matter to me what anyone else "thinks" or "believes" about God, or why.

Signs do matter. Thus, from the signs I could easily see, I know I once had deer and beaver on my land and God is still in my life.

i will gladly amen that, brother.

[roadie]

The problem here is that there's no way to prove that the bible is in fact true. Other writings from other religions have the same chance at being correct as the bible does. The 74 virgin thing may have come from someones imagination, just as the alleged resurrection could have......or,the 74 virgin thing may be entirely true, just as the resurrection thing may. I had thought it was 72 virgins, I ain't about to check on it though.

This debate has been going on for centuries, millions have died defending, as well as forcing, their views on others. Religion, and the bible, are probably the biggest factors used to initiate every major conflict known to man. It's strange though that of all the billions of people who have gone to meet their creator, not a dang one of them has come back to finally put this matter to rest. Not one has sent word that things are just rosy, or the place is full of virgins, or anything at all. I've known people who, if anyone, would be in this magical place called Heaven, but nothing, just crickets.

I would think that any place that can supply all one's wishes, any paradise that lets you fish all day, and get the big one every time, well, I would think such a place would have some way to communicate.......lemme guess, they have sent messages, we're just too dumb to pick up on it. The great thing about religion and the bible, is that there's always an answer, no matter how things have to get twisted around to suit, there's always an answer......if you believe.

[bmortell]

maybe im the only one who thinks it but if i was a clever creator making a sorting process for the afterlife. finding out who will blindly follow something with no proof and repeat whatever I tell them and rage wars over it forever seems like an easy test for exclusion. people say theres traps, but don't consider that they are looking at it..

[a danl]

The problem here is that there's no way to prove that the bible is in fact true. Other writings from other religions have the same chance at being correct as the bible does. The 74 virgin thing may have come from someones imagination, just as the alleged resurrection could have......or,the 74 virgin thing may be entirely true, just as the resurrection thing may. I had thought it was 72 virgins, I ain't about to check on it though.

This debate has been going on for centuries, millions have died defending, as well as forcing, their views on others. Religion, and the bible, are probably the biggest factors used to initiate every major conflict known to man. It's strange though that of all the billions of people who have gone to meet their creator, not a dang one of them has come back to finally put this matter to rest. Not one has sent word that things are just rosy, or the place is full of virgins, or anything at all. I've known people who, if anyone, would be in this magical place called Heaven, but nothing, just crickets.

I would think that any place that can supply all one's wishes, any paradise that lets you fish all day, and get the big one every time, well, I would think such a place would have some way to communicate.......lemme guess, they have sent messages, we're just too dumb to pick up on it. The great thing about religion and the bible, is that there's always an answer, no matter how things have to get twisted around to suit, there's always an answer......if you believe.

Christ's resurrection had many eye witnesses . i have a hard time with anyone who doubts without first having read or even tried to understand the bible , let alone joining a church and giving of their time to hear the word preached . and it must be a bible preaching church, not one with a lot of man made ideas of their own. when anyone uses the term religion it is "mans attempt to reach God by their own understanding and not God's." God is the one who gave us the bible . Jesus is called the Word, back in the book of JOHN it states "in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. P.S i will admit i also at one time was a doubter, however God brought into my life someone who took the time to teach me so that i could understand the truth and therefore become saved. and once someone understands now it becomes very clear and that's where faith happens.

[Rizzo]

The problem here is that there's no way to prove that the bible is in fact true. Other writings from other religions have the same chance at being correct as the bible does. The 74 virgin thing may have come from someones imagination, just as the alleged resurrection could have......or,the 74 virgin thing may be entirely true, just as the resurrection thing may. I had thought it was 72 virgins, I ain't about to check on it though.

This debate has been going on for centuries, millions have died defending, as well as forcing, their views on others. Religion, and the bible, are probably the biggest factors used to initiate every major conflict known to man. It's strange though that of all the billions of people who have gone to meet their creator, not a dang one of them has come back to finally put this matter to rest. Not one has sent word that things are just rosy, or the place is full of virgins, or anything at all. I've known people who, if anyone, would be in this magical place called Heaven, but nothing, just crickets.

I would think that any place that can supply all one's wishes, any paradise that lets you fish all day, and get the big one every time, well, I would think such a place would have some way to communicate.......lemme guess, they have sent messages, we're just too dumb to pick up on it. The great thing about religion and the bible, is that there's always an answer, no matter how things have to get twisted around to suit, there's always an answer......if you believe.

Killing in the name of the Lord.
So sad when thinking about that.

I do not belong to any organized religion myself.
Raised a Catholic, did the altar boy thing and got indoctrinated to the Catholic teachings but do not participate anymore except when my wife wants to go to church on Christmas.

Religions have a built in prejudice.
It goes like this..."Oh! see Bob over there? What a nice guy he is. (Then in a lowered whispered voice) You know he is a Mormon don't you?"
We're right, they are wrong. We are the True Religion.
<sigh>

I can understand some of your opposition to religion.

But, where are you at roadie?
You sound like an Atheist but I am not sure.
What's your idea of how all of this (creation) came to be, and what happens when you die?

[dtknowles]

Christ's resurrection had many eye witnesses . i have a hard time with anyone who doubts without first having read or even tried to understand the bible , let alone joining a church and giving of their time to hear the word preached . and it must be a bible preaching church, not one with a lot of man made ideas of their own. when anyone uses the term religion it is "mans attempt to reach God by their own understanding and not God's." God is the one who gave us the bible . Jesus is called the Word, back in the book of JOHN it states "in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. P.S i will admit i also at one time was a doubter, however God brought into my life someone who took the time to teach me so that i could understand the truth and therefore become saved. and once someone understands now it becomes very clear and that's where faith happens.

How do you know Christ's resurrection had many eyewitnesses? You read it in the bible? Beside the bible is there any recorded eyewitness testimony of the resurrection? Ever by anyone who was not a follower of Jesus?

You are back to saying that we should believe the bible because the bible tells us so.

Tim

[roadie]

Killing in the name of the Lord.
So sad when thinking about that.

I do not belong to any organized religion myself.
Raised a Catholic, did the altar boy thing and got indoctrinated to the Catholic teachings but do not participate anymore except when my wife wants to go to church on Christmas.

Religions have a built in prejudice.
It goes like this..."Oh! see Bob over there? What a nice guy he is. (Then in a lowered whispered voice) You know he is a Mormon don't you?"
We're right, they are wrong. We are the True Religion.
<sigh>

I can understand some of your opposition to religion.

But, where are you at roadie?
You sound like an Atheist but I am not sure.
What's your idea of how all of this (creation) came to be, and what happens when you die?




I had my eyes opened at a young age as to churches and religion. Many of the nastiest people you could ever meet were also devout followers of the bible. Even as a youngster, I could see there was something not quite right about this religion thing. It has always been, and it will always be.

It's been said that god wrote the bible, not true. Man wrote it, man put his interpretation of things into it many times over the course of history. Sure, it can be argued that it contains god's thoughts and these people just recorded them, but there are many, many people who have others living in their heads due to many different things. Some of those people haven't been the nicest ones you could meet. I have no idea how many translations have been done, more than a few I think. Temptation is a very strong thing, what better time to make things right than when it's being translated. I read the bible cover to cover some 45 years ago, took some time and it came off as kinda an ancient Peyton Place thing, sure a lot of sinning going on.

I really don't know what I am, never cared enough to label my beliefs as atheist, or whatever other labels there are. I believe we live and die like any other critter on Earth has for eons. Then we go back to the Earth in whatever form, ashes, bug food......except for the ones who get frozen, mind you, a power failure could raise havoc with their plans on that deal. I think Heaven is the result of man's abject terror on realizing he is not immortal........what if? It sounds much more like someone playing the odds, grabbing at straws, than a true belief in an afterlife and a Heaven.

I also believe that being as this Earth is here, other possibilities most certainly exist, though I don't buy into the Creation thing. More likely a couple of rocks crashed into each other and the Earth was born after a few billion years and the cooking of the needed ingredients delivered the critters, including man. I have no idea where the rocks came from and I really don't care, some things are just what they are. But certainly, possibilities do exist for other life forms, other planets......maybe we all just vaporize into space and join up with all the other energy out there.

[a danl]

How do you know Christ's resurrection had many eyewitnesses? You read it in the bible? Beside the bible is there any recorded eyewitness testimony of the resurrection? Ever by anyone who was not a follower of Jesus?

You are back to saying that we should believe the bible because the bible tells us so.

Tim

exactly , now you're getting somewhere. there are many historical documents that Jesus rose from the grave , you just don't want to believe no matter what.

[6bg6ga]

Its called brainwashing. Religion conditions people thru repetition. How do we know "XXX" because the bible tells us so. it doesn't take to many cycles of this to imprint it into the mind. As I see it and I'm sure this won't go well with others ...Religion satisfies the physiological need to believe in a supreme being. 2.) Religion serves as a behavior modifier. If you think your going to go to hell for killing the neighbor your less likely to do it. 3.) The promise of a prize. Your immortal souls will go to Heaven for eternity. There you have it folks. The human needs satisfied by behavior modification. Throw the fear of God and the Devil into someone and promise a prize at the end for conducting yourself in a normal manner and your saved and society is all the better for it. Take that one step further and add the addition of money into the equation and you now have a TV Church capable of bringing in millions of dollars supporting those Christian ministers. Amen Brother.

[a danl]

you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink............................................. ....

[dtknowles]

exactly , now you're getting somewhere. there are many historical documents that Jesus rose from the grave , you just don't want to believe no matter what.

You will have to point me to them because I have looked for other eyewitness accounts of Jesus resurrection and have not found any. Even the Bible does not have a eyewitness account of the actual resurrection only an empty tomb second hand stories about Jesus appearing to people after he had died.

Tim

[a danl]

You will have to point me to them because I have looked for other eyewitness accounts of Jesus resurrection and have not found any. Even the Bible does not have a eyewitness account of the actual resurrection only an empty tomb second hand stories about Jesus appearing to people after he had died.

Tim

get bill o'reilly's book 'Killing Jesus' he will give info , also a book by Lee Strobell "The Case For Christ" here goes;from the bible ; Luke (one example) chapter 24 verse 38 (after the resurrection ) and he (Jesus) said to them,(his disciples) "why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is i myself. touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that i have.".....you're correct that noone saw the actual resurrection however , when mary magdeline went to the tomb there was an angel there and she thought he was the gardener . he said to her why are you looking for the dead among the living? for He is not here , he has risen.......................maybe i should have said "the resurrected Christ rather than Christ's resurrection.

[1hole]

The problem here is that there's no way to prove that the bible is in fact true. Other writings from other religions have the same chance at being correct as the bible does. The 74 virgin thing may have come from someones imagination, just as the alleged resurrection could have......or,the 74 virgin thing may be entirely true, just as the resurrection thing may. I had thought it was 72 virgins, I ain't about to check on it though.


Excuse me for laughing, no disrespect intended, but you really don't have a clue do you?

[dtknowles]

get bill o'reilly's book 'Killing Jesus' he will give info , also a book by Lee Strobell "The Case For Christ" here goes;from the bible ; Luke (one example) chapter 24 verse 38 (after the resurrection ) and he (Jesus) said to them,(his disciples) "why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is i myself. touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that i have.".....you're correct that noone saw the actual resurrection however , when mary magdeline went to the tomb there was an angel there and she thought he was the gardener . he said to her why are you looking for the dead among the living? for He is not here , he has risen.......................maybe i should have said "the resurrected Christ rather than Christ's resurrection.

That is still the Bible not some other document and it is hear say not eyewitness testimony. How come there is no one saying. "I saw Jesus after he was put in the tomb? We only have second hand accounts and only from his disciples and not from say the Romans or the Pharisees. Testimony for a skeptic is more powerful and from a disciple. A disciple has a motive to lie. It is a fact that Peter is a documented liar, he denied knowing Jesus three times.

Tim

[a danl]

That is still the Bible not some other document and it is hear say not eyewitness testimony.

Tim

tim, i'm sorry but at this point after 2000 years i'd say it's all hear say. if it can't be accepted by faith then i'd say noone can help you.......................by the way Jesus told Peter ahead of time that he was going to deny him three times before the rooster crowed....what's it take tim?

[roadie]

Excuse me for laughing, no disrespect intended, but you really don't have a clue do you?




No offense taken, but I'll tell ya what.

I'll excuse your ignorance, if you'll excuse mine.

[6bg6ga]

Like I said I grew up in the Catholic faith. I remember the sermons at Sunday mass. Still, its hearsay. For all we know God is an Alien. The stories say he can walk on water, turn water into wine, feed hundreds with what was it 6 loaves and fishes? Rise from the dead. Sounds like a supernatural thing or an alien thing to me. Still is hearsay in my opinion no proof only stories second hand by the way. Yet there are people here that believe without a single doubt simple because they have it drummed into them at an yearly age what to believe. Believe that God rose from the dead. Why? The Bible says so. Its proof why? Well just because. Here is the best part... they can poke fun at us the non-believers in the good Christian spirit instead of respecting what we believe. Some of us rely on logic and common sense. Example, your car starts on fire. How do you know? Well, two neighbors witnessed the fire and called 911 and a fire truck was dispatched. See, that is a logical assumption based on fact so I believe it. The story of Adam and Eve having lived a long time having had thousands of children is nonsense. Why? Its impossible for Eve to have that many children unless of course she was non-human which would in my mind start bringing up yet more questions. Sorry, I think the whole concept of religion is based on lies and false truths.

[1hole]

Testimony for a skeptic is more powerful and from a disciple. A disciple has a motive to lie.

It should be difficult to say that with a straight face; what do you think would have been the disciple's motive to lie?

Do you think they - and their followers - wanted to be kicked out of synagogs, separated from their Jewish families and die by stoning? I see nothing attractive about that!

You think the disciples thought there was money to be made? Not only did all but one of the disciples die by torture and with empty pockets and homeless but so did many of their families. And, general terms, they knew most of that up front; you see lots of riches in that?

You think a dozen Jewish guys looked forward to being homeless and poverty stricken for the rest of their lives when all they needed to do to get out of deadly trouble was testify they were "lying" about the resurrection? Or do you really "think" they figgered that as Christians they would live as highly respected men in a Jewish land?

You say there are no "eye witnesses" to the risen Christ in the Bible? There are several eyewitness accounts but the most impressive is found in I Cor 15:6. What other kind of witnesses do you require, what would it take for you to believe them? And don't say they had a mass delusion; that's silly, no 500 people are going to have the same delusion at the same time!

Tim, I know you "think" you think a lot but I can assure you that your perception would be greatly improved if you didn't insist on looking at this Jesus stuff through a small brown orifice! 8-)


* Side Note #1:

It's impossible to take serious anyone who even casually equates Islam with Christianity. For one thing, they've never feared for their lives and family safety around Christians but, sooner or later, Muslims plan to behead them, enslave their children and make their wives sex toys. And that's not my foolish "thought-up" hyperbole BS, it's in their book.

Note #2:

I should and do respect people. But I do not respect people's foolish errors of belief no matter how firmly held, nor do Christians have a duty to do so. Wrong is wrong, no amount of respect can change that.

I know people who actually believe the world is flat and several who don't believe we put men on the moon; some believe 9-11 was a massive US. government black ops. Those are all wrong beliefs so, no matter what some stoned college "professor" says, neither I nor anyone else has a duty to "respect" those silly beliefs.

I don't "respect" wrong religious beliefs either; wrong is wrong. The other errors are harmless but that one error has disasterous eternal consequences!

Christians have a God directed duty to try to get non-believers to actually think it through and find truth for themselves but that's all we have a duty to do.

Few of us are eager for long running but pointless arguments with those who, like Tim, refuse to really think ... and, in that refusal or inability, they certainly aren't unique (2 Tim 3:7).

[dtknowles]

It should be difficult to say that with a straight face; what do you think would have been the disciple's motive to lie?

Do you think they - and their followers - wanted to be kicked out of synagogs, separated from their Jewish families and die by stoning? I see nothing attractive about that!

You think there was money to be made? Not only did all but one of the disciples die by torture and with empty pockets and homeless but so did many of their families. You see lots of riches in that?

You think a dozen Jewish guys looked forward to being homeless and poverty stricken for the rest of their lives when all they needed to do to get out of it was testestify they were "lying"? Do you really "think" they thought that as Christians they would live as highly respected men in their land?

You say there are no "eye witnesses" to the risen Christ in the Bible? There are several such eyewitness accounts but the most impressive is found in I Cor 15:6; what kind of witness account do you require? And don't say it was a mass delusion; that's silly, no 500 people are going to have the same delusion at the same time!

Tim, I know you "think" you think a lot but I can assure you that your perception would be greatly improved if you didn't insist on looking at this Jesus stuff through a small brown orifice! 8-)


* Side Note:

It's impossible to take serious anyone who even casually equates Islam with Christianity. For one thing, they've never feared for their lives and family around Christians but, sooner or later, Muslims plan to behead them, enslave their children and make their wife a sex toy. And that's not my foolish "thought-up" hyperbole, it's in their book.

Did 500 people report seeing the risen Christ or did one person report that 500 people witnessed the risen Christ. How many of those maybe exaggerated 500 people had actually seen the Jesus while he was alive to recognize him after his death.

Besides, these are all still Bible Stories. What about something that is not from the Bible. Some independent accounts.

I can provide a motive for the disciples to lie. Once they have taken the path of being an evangelical disciple and facing potential persecution then exaggerating the works and holiness of their Messiah elevates their religion and their position. You will need a very powerful Savior to attract a following if they are facing persecution.

Actually there are no historical records of the deaths of the Apostles to prove that they died Martyrs or even that they were persecuted. There are only stories and legends. There are historical records that the Romans did persecute Christians and it is not unlikely that the Apostles were Martyred but there are no contemporary records only stories and legends. The Romans kept many records but it does not seem that the Apostles were of particular note to the Roman Leadership. Christianity at the time of the Apostles was so very tiny a population.

http://philandmartha.org/ministry/how-many-christians-were-there-in-the-year-ad-100-2/

Tim

[popper]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

[a danl]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

well said . tim is grasping for straws that don't exist ...noone here can help except the Holy Spirit..

[1hole]

maybe im the only one who thinks it but if i was a clever creator making a sorting process for the afterlife. finding out who will blindly follow something with no proof and repeat whatever I tell them and rage wars over it forever seems like an easy test for exclusion. people say theres traps, but don't consider that they are looking at it..

There is such a "creator", his name is Allah.

[a danl]

That is still the Bible not some other document and it is hear say not eyewitness testimony. How come there is no one saying. "I saw Jesus after he was put in the tomb? We only have second hand accounts and only from his disciples and not from say the Romans or the Pharisees. Testimony for a skeptic is more powerful and from a disciple. A disciple has a motive to lie. It is a fact that Peter is a documented liar, he denied knowing Jesus three times.

Tim

tim, if another document was to come along , you wouldn't believe that either , so what's the point tim? all you're doing is creating havoc , i'm saying so-long

[popper]

The Bible explicitly states that the Trinity is the creator (Master of the Universe) that makes the 'rules', disobedience has consequences. Acceptance of the Trinity relieves the consequences. The Bible also states that there are forces (and people) that are against the Trinity (man made 'rules'?). The Bible then goes on to give examples of the rules, errors and consequences. I have no problem with discussions and thoughts (interpretations) of language & 'historical' details.

[bmortell]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

I cant agree with any of that really. the alternative to the bible is the laws of physics. its the best explanation of everything we got, we call things a theory until they are proven, and update the model when its wrong. if something is unknown the simplest answer that requires the smallest step is the best place to start testing.
people have always attributed some supernatural explanation to things that are outside of their current knowledge and then the laws of physics explains it. for example before the microscope was invented people were dumbfounded on how a jar of water could develop creatures swimming in it if you let it sit sealed on your desk for a while. so people thought things like god must be seeding life in this spot, no other way it got in my sealed jar. same thing with the sun, rain, bad seas, thinking people are witches, you name it. a simple answer has been found for all of them one after another. most of peoples disagreement with religion would be settled if religious people were willing to call things a theory instead of using god as proof of fact on everything they don't know.

and being religious or not has nothing to do with a person being good or bad, so far every person ive met with narcissistic personality disorder, pedophilia and some weird thing for punishing children have all been very openly catholic people. theres plenty of garbage people around without calling them on a side.

[Rizzo]

Roadie, first off, thanks for answering my questions and sharing your views/beliefs.

I'm not on the same page as you but like reading different views on things discussed here.
Some people here get rattled and I suspect feel somewhat threatened to some degree when opposing views are stated.
It's obvious from some of their comments.
But, on the whole, they mean well and are trying to get you and others to "see the light", their way.

....
It's been said that god wrote the bible, not true. Man wrote it, man put his interpretation of things into it many times over the course of history. Sure, it can be argued that it contains god's thoughts and these people just recorded them, but there are many, many people who have others living in their heads due to many different things. Some of those people haven't been the nicest ones you could meet. I have no idea how many translations have been done, more than a few I think.
Yes, the translation thing.
I think it was, what...300 years after Christ when the Bible was written?
I can't help but think that things were forgotten or passed on verbally time after time to the point of introducing some......errors.
Then, there is the language barrier of the original text (Aramaic, Greek?) that needed to be translated to modern day languages. Certainly more room for error there.
Overall though, it is what we have and is full of good stuff and is a historical document as well.



I really don't know what I am, never cared enough to label my beliefs as atheist, or whatever other labels there are. I believe we live and die like any other critter on Earth has for eons. Then we go back to the Earth in whatever form, ashes, bug food......except for the ones who get frozen, mind you, a power failure could raise havoc with their plans on that deal. I think Heaven is the result of man's abject terror on realizing he is not immortal........what if? It sounds much more like someone playing the odds, grabbing at straws, than a true belief in an afterlife and a Heaven.

Yes, labels.....I do not much care for them either.
I can see where, for someone that does not believe in God, one could have that view about heaven.
"Fire and Brimstone" was the mantra that threatened non-believers back "then" and to some degree today.


I also believe that being as this Earth is here, other possibilities most certainly exist, though I don't buy into the Creation thing. More likely a couple of rocks crashed into each other and the Earth was born after a few billion years and the cooking of the needed ingredients delivered the critters, including man. I have no idea where the rocks came from and I really don't care, some things are just what they are. But certainly, possibilities do exist for other life forms, other planets......maybe we all just vaporize into space and join up with all the other energy out there.

The problem with that view is that the rocks had to have come from somewhere.
What was the origin?
Perhaps remnants from the Big Bang Theory? Which then brings up the question of where did the elements that exploded come from.
Some say Life is just a dream. Hmmmm,....could be.
I marvel at all the different plant life, bugs, animals, etc., each with their own physiology and complexities.
Just the "mechanics" of our sensory system of seeing, feeling, etc.. It's mind blowing.
I just see "Intelligent Design" everywhere. I just cannot see where this all just happened by itself.
I see it as God's Creation.

From there things get crazy with all of the different man made religions that state one thing or another.
A lot conflicting with each other, which adds to the confusion for one trying to settle in on what to believe.

[roadie]

Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!



Your post is foolish and illogical. I have met no non-believers who get all bent outa shape like believers do. I have met some fellas who believe, and talk about nasty if you don't agree with them, they'll show you all about nasty right now.....well, try to anyway. It's like you gored their ox, or kicked their dog or something. Every non believer I've met has the attitude of "live and let live", don't kick my dog, I won't kick yours. Sure, there are extremists on either side, but you don't get to tar them all with the same brush.

This thread is about opinions of the bible and it ain't the non believers getting all upset by the opinions being put forth. Another thing, you don't have to be a believer to be "good", you don't have to be a believer to love someone and mourn the loss of them till the very day you die. Saying anything else that besmirches good people is just an example of the hubris, and arrogance that believers project very openly and often. They're one of the reasons for non believers, cause who would want to believe in something that turns them into an arrogant fool.

[1hole]

Actually there are no historical records of the deaths of the Apostles to prove that they died Martyrs or even that they were persecuted. There are only stories and legends. There are historical records that the Romans did persecute Christians and it is not unlikely that the Apostles were Martyred but there are no contemporary records only stories and legends.

Actually, specially about the historical records, you're wrong again. Every historical account ever dug up could easily be deemed "stories and legends" and tossed aside by "smart" people like yourself but deeming something doesn't make it so. Truth is, there have been literally thousands of bits of old writings found in and around the Holy Land. After due scholastic examination and comparison, not one clearly identified fragment has contradicted scripture.

So, again I ask, what evidence do you require to make a historical account of anything believable? No one questions the existence of good ol' Harry Stottle the Greek but we only have a few scraps of anything he wrote while there are tens of thousands for the Bible. So .... maybe we're not too dumm to stick with what makes sense?


The Romans kept many records but it does not seem that the Apostles were of particular note to the Roman Leadership. Christianity at the time of the Apostles was so very tiny a population.

Yes, the Romans kept records of a lot of things, including their years of massive persecutions of the tiny but growing sect known as Christians. But, if you say Josephus wasn't a certified Jewish/Roman historian you might be right ... except it's well known that ol' Joe was exactly that and HE recorded much of what's in scripture at that time. Sure, Joe could have written Greek-type stories and legends but many of his contemporaries would have known it at the time and exposed him as a lier; none did so.


Tim, I find it interesting that you again take off in different directions with misdirection rabbit trail questions but you don't bother to address the single direct question about what motives you think led the disciples to "lie" about their experiences with the risen Lord Jesus. So, I ask again, "What motive do you think caused them to lie themselves to death?"

The disciples couldn't know the details of their coming persecution but they sure knew it was to come (John 16:2). They, all of them but John, went to their (recorded) grizzly deaths rather than recant. Do you deem all of their amply recorded (separate, but unanimous) courage while enduring painful deaths to protect irrelevant stories and legends of a (pointless) group lie?

[popper]

Your post is foolish and illogical Actually my post is exactly what the Bible says. It may seem illogical to what man thinks. Agreed that some with 'religious' fever and attitude can be obnoxious and harmful. Bible states that. If you've read the Bible and understand it, why gripe about the 'religious' actions of others? My comment was NONE of us is good, not that I look down on non-believers.

[EDG]

Actually you have no answer other than waving around your bible.
The human race did without all of that for about 100,000 years and the New World did without it another 1492 years. Then look what happened to the New World when the christians set foot on land. Disease, theft and plunder... Nice bunch of Catholics they were.


Lots of arguments about who is right and who is a better person. Actually makes NO difference! None of us are 'good'!
So you want to believe in an 'alien' god. So where did he come from, who is he, who 'made' him? Life elsewhere in the universe? How big is the universe? Answers? None coming?
Is God real, are Heaven & Hell real? Does it matter? To those that believe, yes - to others - nope. If we believers die and are wrong, no big deal! To non-believers I suppose they think we have wasted our lives attempting to be 'good'. If, on the other hand, non-believers are wrong - opps, big problem for them. Is this just a form of 'fire insurance' as some believe? That appears to be the attitude of some but fails as the Bible tells us.
For me, a very convincing argument is the vehement opposition from non-believers being so great about something they don't believe is a form of 'proof' in the validity of a God, Jesus and Satan. Why do you fight so hard against what you think is a lie when you have no proof that your alternative is correct, nor can you agree on what your alternative actually is? To me, that is an extremely foolish and illogical argument!
On one hand, believers 'care' about others eternal well being. On the other hand, non-believers have no reason to 'care' about us. Your 'loved' one dies, why do you care? If just 'biological', just get another. You are not a psychopath, you have emotion but where does THAT come from? You still got no answer!

[exile]

"Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away." Matthew 24:35 (NASB)

[dtknowles]

tim, if another document was to come along , you wouldn't believe that either , so what's the point tim? all you're doing is creating havoc , i'm saying so-long

If another document was to come along I would likely believe it if it had proper providence. Actually even if it did not have proper providence I might value it as corroboration of the New Testament. You seem to misunderstand. I am not saying that all of the Bible is lies. I am saying that before I believe that Jesus rose from the dead and is thus the Christ I will need evidence other than the Bible. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence not wishful thinking. The miraculous claim that our sins will be forgiven for merely following the words of Jesus is too good to be true. It would seem to me than anyone who believes that is gullible and his salvation is at risk because he might not have worked hard enough to wipe out his sins and make proper amends. If my creating havoc saves some souls then I have done good. Jesus said go and sin no more and he should have add and go and make amends for the harm you have done.

Tim

[1hole]

I think it was, what...300 years after Christ when the Bible was written?

That's not even close.

The list of writings we know as the Old Testament was established by the Jews about 400 years before Jesus' birth. The writings that eventually became the New Testament started appearing quite soon after the resurrection, along with a lot of other religious books. Some of those originally under consideration were spacy philosophical musings, some were outright religious forgeries, a few were written in the 400 year "quite period" between the Testaments. And the true ones. Only those books that survived a lengthy and rigorous examination by serious and Godly men were included in the canon.

In 325 AD, Rome's then emperor, Constantine, called for a convocation of prominent Christian leaders at Nicea, in today's west Turkey, to deal with several major questions in a hope for religious unity; it almost worked. The attendees eventually came to a majority agreement on the already widely known (not brand new) books that would eventually become the N.T. but the canon itself wasn't fully established until about a hundred years later. Ergo, no part of the Bible as we know it was "written" at Nicea in 300 A.D., but Constantine himself had little impact on which books were chosen or rejected from inclusion in the new canon.

I have a hard time keeping a straight face when I hear complaints over the supposed evils of different Bible "translations" (and "versions"). For goodness sake, the originals were written in Greek, Aramaic (the language of Jesus) and Hebrew - and not 1611 King James English either - none of us can read that! The unusual grammar of different languages demands that any translation be a version. There simply isn't any way a transliterated Bible - i.e., a straight translation, word for word - that some folk think they want could be comprehended.

[popper]

I will make an assumption about Tim. I assume he really is an atheist - stick with me. As an atheist, he believes the Bible is untrue(lie). But he uses it to try to 'prove' it is a lie. That is a logic fallacy, like you learned, double negative. Prove my point, 'the moon is made of cheese'. You cannot prove my statement is false based on only that statement. There is NO reliable source to discount the Bible! The Bible speaks of the Resurrection of Jesus and there is NO evidence that is a lie.
Tim has stated recently he is a Theist. All 'religions' of the world (past and present) claim a 'god', therefore are Theist. From Molak to Satan and intersteller thinkers. There is really no difference between Theist and Deists; aka, Buddha, Shintō, Hindi and Confucius.
Ancient Hebrew is an elementary/non-specific written language which is very contextual in form, believed to be an 'accumulation of the mid-east languages - now believed to be started in the Baltic region. I.e. 'words' have varied meanings depending on context usage. Greek (which Jesus spoke fluently) was more specific. Latin even more so. Actually true English is one of the MOST specific - discounting the colloquialisms.

[Rizzo]

I will make an assumption about Tim. I assume he really is an atheist - stick with me. As an atheist, he believes the Bible is untrue(lie). But he uses it to try to 'prove' it is a lie. That is a logic fallacy, like you learned, double negative. Prove my point, 'the moon is made of cheese'. You cannot prove my statement is false based on only that statement. There is NO reliable source to discount the Bible! The Bible speaks of the Resurrection of Jesus and there is NO evidence that is a lie.
Tim has stated recently he is a Theist. All 'religions' of the world (past and present) claim a 'god', therefore are Theist. From Molak to Satan and intersteller thinkers. There is really no difference between Theist and Deists; aka, Buddha, Shintō, Hindi and Confucius.
Ancient Hebrew is an elementary/non-specific written language which is very contextual in form, believed to be an 'accumulation of the mid-east languages - now believed to be started in the Baltic region. I.e. 'words' have varied meanings depending on context usage. Greek (which Jesus spoke fluently) was more specific. Latin even more so. Actually true English is one of the MOST specific - discounting the colloquialisms.
What's your point?
This Forum has members with different views and beliefs and we discuss them here.
It makes it interesting to read other's viewpoints doesn't it?

Because he (DTKnowles - Tim) doesn't believe what you do seems to bother you and others.
I find it rather amusing actually.
He has stated he is not a Christian but does believe in God.
So what?

This Forum isn't just for Christians.
It would be rather boring here if everyone just posted Chapter and Verse now wouldn't it.

[popper]

Only that Tim has been arguing for better than a year that the Bible is not true, with NO justifiable evidence. Just pointing out that his logic in his arguments is a failure. He obviously considers it made up fiction. His opinion, his problem. My opinion, kinda like gun opposition, no real facts, just opinion. Actually the other problem for believers, he is promoting an anti-God thesis.
I won't comment more.

[dtknowles]

Only that Tim has been arguing for better than a year that the Bible is not true, with NO justifiable evidence. Just pointing out that his logic in his arguments is a failure. He obviously considers it made up fiction. His opinion, his problem. My opinion, kinda like gun opposition, no real facts, just opinion. Actually the other problem for believers, he is promoting an anti-God thesis.
I won't comment more.

I believe in God, there is but one God. The creator of all things.

I don't believe parts of the Bible. I did not say the Bible is all lies, some parts of it are clearly not the literal truth, they are parables and other parts are so fantastic that I can't believe them without more evidence.

I think the people who accept the bible as the truth are naïve. I don't believe in miracles. I believe God achieves what God wants using the forces of nature God designed. Of course God understands and can control the forces of nature in ways we can't and can't understand.

Tim

[dtknowles]

I will make an assumption about Tim. I assume he really is an atheist.

Tim has stated recently he is a Theist. All 'religions' of the world (past and present) claim a 'god', therefore are Theist. From Molak to Satan and intersteller thinkers. There is really no difference between Theist and Deists...…………...

You acknowledge my claim to be a Theist but go on and assume I am an Atheist. I assure you I believe in God and while I don't condemn Atheists for their lack of belief in God, I do condemn them it the are immoral. Right and wrong are independent of God.

Regarding "There is really no difference between Theist and Deists." Seriously they are very different.

theist
[ˈTHēist]

NOUN
a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe.

deist
[ˈdēist, ˈdāist]

DEFINITION
noun

a person who believes in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe.

Do you see the difference now?

Christians are theists.


Tim

[a danl]

You will have to point me to them because I have looked for other eyewitness accounts of Jesus resurrection and have not found any. Even the Bible does not have a eyewitness account of the actual resurrection only an empty tomb second hand stories about Jesus appearing to people after he had died.

Tim

tim , what about the dead sea scrolls ? they are other documents that clearly reference isaiah

[dtknowles]

Yes, the Dead Sea Scrolls duplicate some of what is the Old Testament. I think that there is even an older find that includes parts of the Hebrew Bible canon. Isaiah had been dead for hundreds of years before the Dead Sea Scrolls were written. The Dead Sea scrolls are not different from the Bible they are just copies of the same stories written hundreds of years before they were copied into the Bible.

Tim

[1hole]

Only that Tim has been arguing for better than a year that the Bible is not true, with NO justifiable evidence. Just pointing out that his logic in his arguments is a failure. He obviously considers it made up fiction. His opinion, his problem.

Tim's just lonesome and wants someone to listen to him pontificate about what he "believes." What he believes is much less important even to him than simply being heard and the web is the only captive audience he has; I suspect that in our Christian desire to help him we are the only ones who pay him any attention at all. That's sad.

I wish Tim well but I don't beat my head against rock walls and I'm not a head shrink so ... ???

[trapper44shooter]

The word of god is true these is a vurse in the bible that states let the word of god be true & every man a liar

[1hole]

The word of god is true these is a vurse in the bible that states let the word of god be true & every man a liar

Rom 3:4-8

[dtknowles]

Tim's just lonesome and wants someone to listen to him pontificate about what he "believes." What he believes is much less important even to him than simply being heard and the web is the only captive audience he has; I suspect that in our Christian desire to help him we are the only ones who pay him any attention at all. That's sad.

I wish Tim well but I don't beat my head against rock walls and I'm not a head shrink so ... ???

What makes you think I am lonesome? Does not take much time to write this stuff here.

I have a full life, job, family, friends, hobbies, pets. No, not lonesome. You just wish. You seem to want to think of me as unhappy, sad for you. Kind of evil.

I spend some time here trying to help some people see the light and you want to run me down.

Nobody here is a captive audience. I have hundreds of followers on Medium. Maybe go look at what I write there. They are not a captive audience either.

https://medium.com/@timknowles

https://medium.com/@timknowles/your-logic-in-the-following-does-not-hold-adeeb1304c12

https://medium.com/@timknowles/we-are-being-gaslighted-2a219a02ea11

Tim

[popper]

I do not make my comments lightly to Tim, my conviction is that his 'logic' is not logical, it has faults. He contradicts himself. He uses definitions to state his beliefs, Ok. But doesn't believe in 'miracles' but does believe in Creation. Doesn't believe in the Resurrection of Jesus because of no collaborating 'evidence' from other sources. As I stated to him, you think the Romans or Jews are going to write about the guards failure to prevent theft of the body? If ANY of it happened, explain please! This was a violent time to live, the Romans built a ramp to kill zealots, a bridge across a large river to tick off the germans. Do something not 'approved' and you die. Guards that failed were terminated - that is in scripture and elsewhere. Vlad the 'impaler' was a nice guy comparatively.

[cainttype]

I occasionally attempt to remind everyone that this thread is/was intended to give an opportunity for each member to share their personal opinions on Biblical texts. It was hoped they could explain why, or how, they had come to those conclusions.
There will never be consensus on the question “Truth, myth... in whole or in part?”, but by honest discussion we might be better able to understand each other, whether we disagree (intensely), or not.

As a general rule, everyone with an opinion believes they are right.. kinda the nature of the beast, as far as having opinions goes.
In essence, this thread was not an attempt to prove whose opinion was correct, but rather to give those that might be interested a chance to better understand those that don’t share the same views.

Hopefully, with a little patience, we may learn more about each other, even if we don’t learn anything new about our opinions, or persuasive enough to change them.
Understanding each other a little better, even if we simply agree to disagree... That’s never a bad thing.

[dtknowles]

I do not make my comments lightly to Tim, my conviction is that his 'logic' is not logical, it has faults. He contradicts himself. He uses definitions to state his beliefs, Ok. But doesn't believe in 'miracles' but does believe in Creation. Doesn't believe in the Resurrection of Jesus because of no collaborating 'evidence' from other sources.……..

You are right, sometimes I contradict myself. I would not mind having that pointed out. Some times my logic probably has faults. Nobody is perfect. This is the second time you mentioned my contradiction regarding creation and you are right. I have been thinking about it since you first mentioned it. I guess I do believe in miracles but I am very skeptical. Creation is undeniable and miraculous. Other miracles, incredible things require incredible evidence.

I don't believe in the Resurrection of Jesus. I don't say it did not happen, I don't know. I don't believe it did and it will take some incredible evidence to convince me. I am open minded about it. It is only supported by the weakest of evidence, 2000 year old hearsay testimony. Your explanation of why evidence is so scarce is credible but explaining why evidence is scarce is not evidence. It does not make the existing evidence stronger. It could mean there will never be enough evidence to make a convincing case.

Tim