It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If you don't believe all the bible, why believe any of it?

page: 5
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Murgatroid
 


Well.... that's from a Baptist preacher ... not a regular person. He has an agenda so I'm not going to take his alleged Near Death Experience at his word. I've had too many dealings with Baptist preachers to trust their take on things.




posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   

JohnnyCanuck
what about Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

What about ....

Jesus ... Says - 'The meek shall inherit the Earth'
'God' of the OT ... Tells Moses to take over 'the promised land' by force.

Jesus ... Mercy incarnate. Forgiveness.
'God' of the OT ... Adam and Eve take a bite from an apple, so they and all mankind are forever punished with illness and pain and death.

Jesus ... Says - 'Love God and love your neighbor'
'God' of the OT - tells Joshua to slaughter whole towns of innocent people and animals for no reason.

Jesus ... says 'forgive seven times seventy times'
Jesus ... says 'But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also (Mt 5:38-39)
'God' of the OT - 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand'
(which just leaves a lot of angry blind lame people )

Jesus directly contradicted the Old Testament 'God's violence -
Jesus Repudiation of Old Testament Violence


Most interestingly, in Deuteronomy Moses goes so far as to stress that the law must not be waved aside out of compassion. “Show no pity,” the text says, “ life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (Deut 19:21). Yet, Jesus not only commands people to “show pity,” he replaces the Old Testament quid pro quo ethic with his radical ethic of unconditional love.

For example, while the Old Testament allowed Israelites to hate their enemies and sometimes command them to slaughter them, Jesus forbid his disciples from ever hating or doing any harm to an enemy. Instead, he commanded people to “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt 5:43-45). Luke includes the command to “do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you” and “pray for those who mistreat you” (Lk 6:27-28).

Most surprising of all, Jesus emphatically makes loving enemies rather than hating them the precondition to being a child of God. We’re to love, bless, pray for and do good to our enemies “that you may be children of your Father in heaven” (Mt 5:45, emphasis added). Only if we love indiscriminately can we “be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked” (Lk 6:35). Small wonder, therefore, that when Peter drew his sword in self-defense — acting in accordance with Old Testament norms — Jesus rebuked him.


Jesus Without Baggage

But who wrote about God in the Old Testament? Was it God writing his own autobiography, or was it people writing about God as they understood him? I think it was the latter. The Old Testament is a collection of material written by many people, in many situations, over a long period of time. What they had in common was that they felt a connection to God or with the nation Israel.

Perhaps God provided special insights to some of them in some way, but we don’t know to what extent, and it seems that they had a very incomplete understanding of God. The Old Testament idea of God certainly reflects many of the assumptions about gods in the surrounding cultures of that day—things that we no longer believe.

The writers of the Old Testament were bound by the periods in which they lived, and their ideas of an angry, violent, vindictive God were products of their limitations. It is an incredible burden on them to expect that they were perfect in everything they wrote.



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ArtemisE
 

Agreed. Ive seen "bible-thumpers"...hard core believers, when asked about "giants" in Genesis or "wheels in the sky"...deny that by saying "Welll! It doesn't really MEAN that!". Either its the "literal word of God" or its not.*

*Special thanks to the Council of Nicea and that KIng in England-both who decided which of God's words and testaments to keep and which ones to throw out.

Go to a bookstore and ask for a "bible". They'll ask you..."Which one-version?" So much for the "literal word of God".

MS (a Christian)



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   

ArtemisE


This is for those Christians who don't believe in the literal truth of creation and the bible. But do believe and concierge them selves Christians.

How do you decide what to believe and what not to? To an atheist it looks like cherry picking what people wish were true. While ignoring the things you don't agree with. It seems to me that almost every Christian as a nearly completely different take on what all consider to absolute truth. Logically how can any truth be found when no one even agrees on the fundamentals?


This is for those biologists who don't believe in the literal truth of the central dogma of molecular biology and the biology textbook. But do believe and concierge [sic] them selves [sic] biologists.

How do you decide what to believe and what not to? To a layman it looks like cherry picking what people wish were true. While ignoring the things you don't agree with. It seems to me that almost every biologist as [sic] a nearly completely different take on what all consider to absolute truth. Logically how can any truth be found when no one even agrees on the fundamentals?



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Trender
 


IDK???? Maybe because the have created products and medicine we use daily. While the worlds religions have only offered faith against all reason. Oh and can't forget the little invention called a microscope. Where they actually get to watch me cells do what they do. I know that's a little thinner than " a bunch of Bronze Age goat herders believed in an omnipresent invisible force who made the universe in 7 days. But.... Lmao!



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 

You're right.
The Bible does contradict itself all over the place.



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ArtemisE
 


In a way, I think I respect the crazy arsed fundamentalists point of view more than the modern, moderate religious folk.

The fundamentalists love their chosen holy book warts and all. Love me, love my wrinkles. They wear their ignorance like a freaking badge of honor. There is a certain purity and honesty in that you can't help but admire..

They don't try to play multiple choice, or choose their own adventure with scripture.

The modern feelygood christians want to have their cake and eat it too. The moment you start chopping and choosing, the validity of the entire thing goes out of the window.

*

May as well just make up stuff on the spot at that point..

*OT - But why the hell does this stupid post interface keep editing out the word 'Window"!?
edit on RAmerica/Chicago31uSun, 23 Mar 2014 21:07:17 -05003-0500fCDT09 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: I just like to see the edit message at the end of every post



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Well, I'm a Catholic, and Catholics believe there is no contradiction between proven scientific fact and the truth of God.

I don't know of any Christians who don't believe that God created everything-it's about when and how long it took.

Maybe it was 6 days of Creation from God's perspective but billions of years from our perspective. We don't know how time works for God.

Maybe He used evolution to do it. Seems to make more sense to let natural things develop naturally instead of making them just appear.

The 4004 BC thing was invented by Bishop Usser tracing the Biblical genealogies back. But his timetable is based on the supposition that Adam was 30 years old when created (which is not in the Bible) and the non-Scriptural idea that he sinned IMMEDIATELY, which started his aging. There is no mention in the Bible of the length of time between Creation and the Fall of Man. Maybe Adam lived in the Garden of Eden for 100,000 years.



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 10:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Snsoc
 


It helps to be really vague when you're spitting BS because if someone comes back and calls you on it, there's all sorts of blank spaces to park the next round of BS. Just saying.



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ArtemisE
 


Sorry if this type of metaphor has already been used but...

That's kind of like saying if you don't like every song off of an album, why listen to any of them?



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Prezbo369
 



Christians seem to have forgotten that up until around 50 yrs ago they all took the bible literally and were all creationists.

More like 150 years ago. The heyday of Biblical literalism is long gone.

Since late Victorian times, most Christians have understood and accepted that much of the Bible is historically and scientifically inaccurate. The literalists are mostly concentrated in America, and tend to be members of degenerate charismatic cults rather than of real Christian churches — that is, those that recognise the Apostolic Succession, such as Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran, Wesleyan, etc.



posted on Mar, 23 2014 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Snsoc
 


I agree about the geneologies and the fact no one knows gods time table. However the bible is pretty specific. It says 1 day per big addition and 7 days till completion. A day should be a pretty universal concept...... At least in the whole revolution around the sun part.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 12:01 AM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Snsoc
 


It helps to be really vague when you're spitting BS because if someone comes back and calls you on it, there's all sorts of blank spaces to park the next round of BS. Just saying.


At the risk of feeding a possible troll, what are you talking about?

What vagueness? What BS?



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 12:55 AM
link   

ArtemisE
reply to post by ketsuko
 


Actually if you didn't research, then your belief in science would be faith based. However if you care to learn the mechanics of the universe. Then see those mechanics tested and proven correct. You don't need faith at all. You know scientifically what conclustion to make. I'm not reading a mainly disproven science text book and having faith some of its true. That's what Christians do with the bible.

IMHO if god were real it should be testable. Prayer should have a measurable effect on more then just people's brain. Or some such animal.

Oh hate to beat a dead horse, but the creation story is testable... We know you can't have planets, oceans and plants before you have stars... That's very testable.


you said it yourself, "mechanics"! that's all science does.

everything is already here to UNCOVER. not create. they invent new ways to use what they discover.

i believe in the bible, lots i haven't a clue about but it's the same with science, for me.

how recently have people needed a trial to be stoned to death?

biblical creation? 7 days? is that using swiss movement or an atomic clock?

everyone knows what an accretion disk is, right? how can you see stars and stuff when it hasn't all disappeared?

our star isn't the oldest in the universe, let alone the galaxy.

it's funny when i hear people here believe in aliens making us and don't believe in God.

the bible is the bible, science is science. someday the twain shall meet.

i hope there will be plenty of eggs for all the faces when that happens.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:13 AM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by deadlyhope
 



It is believed the Bible is a book from god, not that each and every copy was hand-written in simple terms everyone can understand/no one could debate.


Because no god would ever resort to such infallible, practical, common-sense measures, right? Its ludicrous to think they might actually take steps to prevent a notoriously flawed society from misreading or misinterpreting something so sacred and important. Utterly laughable, right?


aren't we human? lol!

let's put it this way, the bible is filled with fallible, impracticable, nonsensical societies.
heck, look around you! people want to blame God?

bible has been consistent for a couple 1000 yrs. science hasn't, has it?



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:24 AM
link   

ArtemisE
reply to post by Snsoc
 


I agree about the geneologies and the fact no one knows gods time table. However the bible is pretty specific. It says 1 day per big addition and 7 days till completion. A day should be a pretty universal concept...... At least in the whole revolution around the sun part.



One possibility is that the Bible isn't talking about literal days-I mean, the sun doesn't even show up on the first "day," yet there is "morning and evening."

Another possibility has to do with time being relative to the observer's location. I'm not going to pretend I understand this, but there is an explanation given here by an MIT physicist attempting to find a harmony between science and the Torah. This theory is what I meant when I said that God sees time differently than we do. From His perspective, it may have been six days; from ours, 15 billion years.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:31 AM
link   

jimmyx
for all the people that say the bible is the truth....which truth?
www.youtube.com...
this video shows that there could be up to 50 books of the bible that were left out. and that's not even counting what has been edited out of the ones that are currently in circulation. "the word of god" becomes meaningless, when "man" has changed it for centuries.
I personally have 1 belief, no church needed, no priest needed, no book needed....it's called the "golden rule"...easy to understand, extremely hard to follow 100% percent of the time...


one would think, logically, that any edits and so called re-sculpture of the bible would be very concise in it's message, right?

the words would be static. one cohesive message no one can dispute. right? no contradictional writings or multiple accounts of the same incidents. why? if it was mind control, it would be a little red book, no?

but we even do that with novels and history and text books. analyze that is.

why include the book of ester? it never mentions God. one of 2 books that don't.
the book of ester being included in the bible is a sort of mystery.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by ArtemisE
 

The new testament is the biggest book of lies on the planet. As for the old testament there is truth amongst the fables. But 90 % of it is lies to fill a empty void of spiritual inquirsision all for the sake of control over the masses though the collective conscience of mass manipulation to prolong the inevitable spiritual ascension of becoming the inevitable.

As long as you believe and accept the hypocritical guilt tripping crap that comes out of the Vatican and other religions. You will be spiritually, emotionally and mentally bounded to the physical realm. You will never be able to reach a level of spiritual ascension that were all can be knowen at once but seem compleatly irrelevant at the same time cause the only thing that matters to you is your appreciation for all living forces in the universe and unity with all.



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:49 AM
link   

JohnnyCanuck
reply to post by FlyersFan
 

You're right.
The Bible does contradict itself all over the place.




why do you think that is?

because it's a more sophisticated form of mind control?



posted on Mar, 24 2014 @ 01:55 AM
link   

JohnnyCanuck
reply to post by FlyersFan
 

You're right.
The Bible does contradict itself all over the place.



I have to agree with that.




new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join