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.

 

Errors in the Bible

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Heavens, we have posters posting incorrect information accusing others of being wrong.

In order then: The KJV is not correct either, not the 1611, not the revised editions and not the New King James Bible. It comes to us through the ages by decree and by revision from a variety of sources, including but not limited to the Reims NT and the English Douay Bible of the 17th century made from the vulgate of the 14th century, the very same bible it was intended to make defunct, the Codex Vaticanus of the 4th century, the Latin Vulgate of the 14th century, and later, the Alexandrian Bible of the 17th century. Contrary to popular belief, the Seputagint, the original or versions thereof were not available to use. The KJV relied heavily on the Vaticanus where other Greek canons were insufficient. The Septuagint’s creation is surrounded by what is considered fable, in that the story of the Jewish scholars presenting the Hebrew text seems more mythical than real. Nonetheless, the history of the LXX is such that it was accepted by the Jews during the time they spoke mostly Greek, but was later rejected when it came to light, numerous mistranslations, or perhaps too many questions.

The Pentateuch is attributed to Moses, with no verification, and rewritten by Esdras as per a vision in the 6th century BCE, because the word of God was lost, and supposedly miraculously found after he rewrote same.

The Gospels of the NT were written between late 1st and 2nd centuries. The Gospel of Mark, according to Ireneaus c125CE is attributed to Matthew which St. John had to approve. It is noteworthy that Irenaeus supposedly was a disciple of John…note Irenaeus was born c115 and 125CE. which should raise an eyebrow or two about Christ’s 33 years on this earth.

Satan is tricking man- Yes indeed he is! Be careful not to be tricked, he counts on your blind faith of what he tells you.

The thought of the present day is that Mark and John were first to be written. Matthew and Luke are prominent only because they were widespread in Alexandria, as supported by Oxyrhynchus finds. The Bishops of Alexandria played prominently in the first councils.

Defrag- But the Book is never sufficient. Why not just shut up and let God speak His Own Way--"the still small voice" of Reason, Compassion, Mercy, and Gentleness? Why not participate in All the Covenants, not just one
Here! Here! It is after all the optimum message, regardless of who and how many it took to get the point across. This requires a transcendence of religion however, which man is not ready to acquiesce to.

The references to Jesus’ birth can all be found in the OT, anyone can write a story based on past predictions. I do believe we have the seer, Nostradamus’s predictions on this site that would attest to that, find a quatrain, choose a relatively close apocalyptic event and voila! it is fact. It takes little to recite that which was already written, especially decades after the fact when pen is put to papyrus.

“Adam was the first in the line of David.” Now there is a concept of unimaginable proportions. Why I never knew the thrust of the Hebrew texts was to present themselves as the children of God.




posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Slicky1313

Shauny, I hate to break it to ya (not really) but your not gonna find God anytime soon. why?
it says in the Bible "No man seeks after God, no not one" and then later on explains how people only seek out God if God puts it in them to seek God out.
God has obviously not put it in you, so u will not find him, because your not looking and you cant, u cant cause of that verse right now.


The verse that you are talking about is Romans 3:11. You have taken it out of context and misquoted it. Paul was quoting Psalms 14. As he does on occasion, Paul has painted a word picture to show what people are like compared to Gods' law. At the end of the passage, he goes on to sum up just that - "Therefore no one will be declared righteous in His sight by observing the law." (Romans 3:20)

The other part that you are referring to is something hotly debated within the church. Were all Christians predestined to be Christians? There is a verse that suggests it. I believe that what the verse is speaking of is Gods' omniscience (sp). God knew at the creation of the world whether or not I would come to a relationship with him. He knew all of the choices I would make and how my life would end up. He still makes sure everyone hears the message and has ample oportunity to make the right decision, but he knows if we will make it or not.

The only other thing that I would say is that we should not assume the mind of God. We have no clue what God has in store for ourselves, let alone others. We have only the job of telling others of the gospel. God would never write off a person, so we shouldn't either.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Corinthas

"A good feel" maybe but i dont go round caliming to know how he thought about the place of the nude in art or what his favorite pen was.



I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this sect. I didn't realize some one had done this.



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I agree with otherwise.

Get you an Authorized King James. That is the only Bible in English that is accurate.

When people say the Bible contradicts itself, I have to wonder what version they're reading. The modern versions contradict themselves, the King James, and each other in various places. The King James does not contradict itself.

The translators working on the King James in the early 17th century didn't have the equivalent of Hebrew 1 or Aramaic 2B in college. Those people KNEW the languages as well as English, and could even think in those languages.

It's promised in the Bible that God's Word shall never pass away. If we don't have an accurate translation, then that means God lied, when you think about it.

I also have to add that the KJV1611 was based on the Textus Receptus. All other versions are based on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus--which are CORRUPTED texts. The Roman Catholic church did everything they could to keep the Bible from the people, and failing that did everything they could to corrupt it. In fact, that's what the Gunpowder Plot was about.

[edit on 1/3/2005 by Amethyst]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   
The King James Version is NOT the most accurate. Why won't people devote the time to trying to interpret the words of God the way they were meant instead of taking the easy way out and trusting the words of men.

I will show you FOUR cases of mistranslation that have had profound significance in their mistranslation:

Exodus 20:7 - deep in the heart of the sacred 10 commandments

KJV - "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord they God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain."

The New JPS Translation of the Holy Scriptures: "You shall not swear falsely by the name of the Lord your God; for the Lord will not clear one who swears falsely by His name."

Josephus, writing in approximately 70 A.D. confirms this translation:

"- the third, That we must not swear by God in a false matter;"

It has also been translated as "do not use the name of the Lord God in your vain cause"...which, in essence, is exactly the same as swearing falsely and invoking the name of God while doing so.

Now, though God may get miffed with me when I slip a well-rounded "god damn it"...I don't believe this would have made it to the top ten "don't do's". But I can very well see how the CORRECT translation would have made it to the top three.

Semantics...not at all because it is under this mistranslation that the Catholic church waged its VAIN and FALSE crusades in the name of MY Merciful Lord God...but I can't help but notice how changing the translation made that all fit better with the masses...and their vain cause.

Exodus 20:13 - again, deep in the heart of the sacred 10 commandments

KJV - "Thou shalt not kill."

The New JPS Translation of the Holy Scriptures: "You shall not murder."

Josephus, writing in 70 A.D. confirms: "That we must abstain from murder."

word translated to "kill" in KJV: retsach: a crushing; spec. a murder-cry. - slaughter,s word. from ratsach: to dash in pieces i.e. kill (a human being), ESPECIALLY to murder - put to death, kill, (man-) slay (-er), murder (-er)

Gesenius goes on to say "to act the homicide".

There are only four places this word is used in the Old Testament and each and every time it is used to imply an unjust, criminal act of murdering...not sacrificing, not killing in war, not self-defense...but MURDER.

third case...

Again, the Christ states in Matthew 5:21:

KJV - "Thou shalt not kill"

The Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (w/NRSV): "'You shall not murder'"

word translated to "kill": phoneuo: to be a murderer - kill, do murder, slay.

root phonos: murder - murder, + be slain with, slaughter.

This mistranslation has led to MUCH argument and MUCH misunderstanding of further happenings in the Holy Scriptures.

Fourth case...

Acts 17:22-23 - Paul's Sermon on Mount Mars to the Greek - after seeing their many alters to their many gods and even one to the "unkown God".

KJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription. TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you."

The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (with NRSV): "Then Paul stood in front of the Areopagus and said, "Athenians, I see how extremely religious you are in every way. For as I went through the city and looked carefully at the objects of your worship, I found among them an altar with the inscription, 'To an unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you."

deisdaimonesteros - the comparative of a derivation of the base of (timid, faithless - fearful and (to distribute fortunes); a demon or supernatural spirit (of a bad nature) - devil.); more religious than others; - too superstitious.

Now, though I understand how translating the above using a "comparative of a derivation of the base of two words" and painting Paul's words to be placing the Greeks in disdain as "too superstitious" fits better with the masses when you're getting ready to ride out and commit genocide against pagans and chop down all their trees...that's not necessarily what he seems to have been saying, does it?

He seems to have been understanding of the fact they did not know of the "unknown God" they had erected an altar to in the "fearful" attempt they had left a deity out they shouldn't of!

No...my Christ taught me to share the gospel, and pray for the acceptance of it, but not forced conversions or the inhumane treatment of others who cannot understand and accept my beliefs....and to shake the dirt off my shoes and truck on down the road when the gospel is rejected. I can even whistle if I want along the way. And if I stump my toe and slip a g-d...that's okay, just as long as I don't concoct a vain cause in the name of God.

Those with eyes will see...those with ears will hear. And those with the heart to understand the mercies and grace of God will continue to delve beyond the words of men.


[edit on 1-3-2005 by Valhall]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Text Black

the reason all four gospels seem different to a person who is reading is simple. do u have the same opinion as your friend even if u both saw the exact same event. No is the ansewer. No matter how many people saw something everyone will describe what they saw a little different. Peoples words will change. Lets say four people saw a beautiful fire works display. a reporter came up to each individual to get a description of what they saw. each person will describe it in their own way. but because one may say it was nice. and another may say it was awsome and another i have seen better. dosnt mean the fireworks didnt take place it just means everyone has their own veiw points. which only tells u that much more that what is written in the four gospels has to be true.

[edit on 3-1-2005 by Shar]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seapeople
The Bible is full of errors. Some are probably from bad translations. Most though, are from lack of knowledge at the time. Books written by different people. Discrepencies due to lack of contenuity. Man, there are probably 10 thousand horribly bad "mistakes" in the bible.

For instance: Try to read all 4 gospels in the new testament. Then tell me what actually happened on the day jesus rose from the dead. Tell me one story...without disregarding three other Gospels. Tell me how many apostles there were. Tell me whether or not you can see the face of God and live. Tell me whether or not we carry original sin (this is a good one).

You can't because it says one thing in one place, and a different thing somewhere else. It isnt all translation. It is more like trying to tell a giant lie over and over again...and keeping all your facts straight.



U can see the face of God and Live only if u r worthy enough too. since he is so bright and without fault r u saying u r worthy enough. Moses saw only his back side and aged beyond his years and was so bright himself that he had to wear a veil to cover himself. Yes we are all born into sin. It is by Jesus' blood that we are saved. it is by him that we have a chance to live. think of him as your lawyer. the one who saved you from hell. if u read with understanding with the Holy Spirit it is not hard to figure out.
[edit on 3-1-2005 by Shar]

[edit on 3-1-2005 by Shar]



posted on Jan, 3 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
I agree with otherwise.

Get you an Authorized King James. That is the only Bible in English that is accurate...

I also have to add that the KJV1611 was based on the Textus Receptus. All other versions are based on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus--which are CORRUPTED texts.
Sometimes it is best to leave off endorsements. Here is an example of a review of the Textus Receptus which you claim is the basis of the KJV:
" Erasmus, having little time to prepare his edition, could only examine manuscripts which came to hand. His haste was so great, in fact, that he did not even write new copies for the printer; rather, he took existing manuscripts, corrected them, and submitted those to the printer. (Erasmus's corrections are still visible in the manuscript 2.)… Not only is 1t an Andreas manuscript rather than purely Byzantine, but it is written in such a way that Erasmus could not always tell text from commentary and based his reading on the Vulgate. Also, 1t is defective for the last six verses of the Apocalypse. To fill out the text, Erasmus made his own Greek translation from the Latin. He admitted to what he had done, but the result was a Greek text containing readings not found in any Greek manuscript -- but which were faithfully retained through centuries of editions of the Textus Receptus. This included even certain readings which were not even correct Greek”


And: “the TR primarily resulted from the work of a Dutch Roman Catholic priest and Greek scholar by the name of Desiderius Erasmus, who published his first Greek New Testament text in 1516. The first edition of Erasmus' text was hastily and haphazardly prepared over the extremely short period of only five months. (ibid., page 106) That edition was based mostly upon two inferior twelfth century Greek manuscripts, which were the only manuscripts available to Erasmus "on the spur of the moment"- Bruce Metzger

If then the KJV did come from the TR, then it is far from accurate. Now, the 47 or 54 translators, whatever the number was wrote: "Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch. The Greek editions of Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza were all accessible, as were the Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglots, and the Latin translations of Pagninus, Termellius, and Beza.”

As you can see, Erasmus and those translations after him, adding to the TR; the Complutensian, and Beza, were not the basis of the KJV, it was a compilation of many. The Latin texts would have been the RCC’s Vulgate for example, from which came the English Bible the KJV was intended to overpower, the Douai Bible. The derivation of the Antwerp Polyglots and Pagninus might prove valuable research for you in this regard.

In essence the whole exercise was farcical where, none of the Codices were in agreement with each other, either through a differing number of books, verses, or translations. But The KJV 47 managed to mix and match and provide the most referenced Bible in over 400 years.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 05:26 AM
link   
You cannot look upon the face of god and live to tell the tale, but then in genesis it tells us...he hath seen god face to face.

"I have seen God face to face" - Genesis 32:30

"No man hath seen God at any time"- John 1:18

The all powerful god. Matthew tells us all things are possible with god, then again he cannot drive out some inhabitants because they had iron chariots.

"With God all things are possible." - Matthew 19:26

"The Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." - Judges 1:19

These are just a couple of the many thousand of inconsistancies in the bible. Do not sit there and tell me those aren't direct contradictions, when it's obviously clear there are many.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
You cannot look upon the face of god and live to tell the tale, but then in genesis it tells us...he hath seen god face to face.

"I have seen God face to face" - Genesis 32:30
Hello, this was a man he wrestled he never even told him his name. since this man was great and took his hip we can assume its an angel but guess what it does not say it was God. This man just bragged as if it were cause the fight was so great. an angel was trying this mans spirit.
"No man hath seen God at any time"- John 1:18

The all powerful god. Matthew tells us all things are possible with god, then again he cannot drive out some inhabitants because they had iron chariots.

"With God all things are possible." - Matthew 19:26

"The Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." - Judges 1:19
um this is WAR u do know what that is. Oh God could of wiped them clean however this was mans war. God was just with him not fighting for him. At this point in the war. the army was to great in number to be taken over by man. God was with him not doing it. to pick out a verse or two is just stupid. u do believe in the Bible thats why u try so hard to disapprove it. It scares that crap out of u. and it should satan himself is terrified--hes scared so bad hes trying to take as many souls with him as he can.
These are just a couple of the many thousand of inconsistancies in the bible. Do not sit there and tell me those aren't direct contradictions, when it's obviously clear there are many.
Theres not many just man.





posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
"I have seen God face to face" - Genesis 32:30
Hello, this was a man he wrestled he never even told him his name. since this man was great and took his hip we can assume its an angel but guess what it does not say it was God. This man just bragged as if it were cause the fight was so great. an angel was trying this mans spirit.


well to me you haven't really come to any conclusion as to why someone did look upon the face of god. when later on john tells us if you do you will surely die. also what you said was the man was ''bragging''. is this what genesis is just men bragging?



"The Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." - Judges 1:19

um this is WAR u do know what that is. Oh God could of wiped them clean however this was mans war. God was just with him not fighting for him. At this point in the war. the army was to great in number to be taken over by man. God was with him not doing it. to pick out a verse or two is just stupid. u do believe in the Bible thats why u try so hard to disapprove it. It scares that crap out of u. and it should satan himself is terrified--hes scared so bad hes trying to take as many souls with him as he can.


i like that... 'you believe in the bible and that's why you're trying to disprove it'. i don't really need to disprove it, it disproves itself by being such a contradictory, inconsistant work of man, with no inspiration of a god whatsoever.
''It scares the crap out of me''. well no it doesnt...im trying to say the bible is wrong, theres no salvation, no heaven etc. if i believe that the bible is wrong then i also don't believe in hell so therefore when i die there's nothing. why would i need to be scared of absolutly nothing. plus if there is heaven and hell im really not too worried where i go...hell might even be a laugh, afterall billions upon billions will be there according to you, so its not like ill be on my own



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby

Originally posted by Shar
"I have seen God face to face" - Genesis 32:30
Hello, this was a man he wrestled he never even told him his name. since this man was great and took his hip we can assume its an angel but guess what it does not say it was God. This man just bragged as if it were cause the fight was so great. an angel was trying this mans spirit.


well to me you haven't really come to any conclusion as to why someone did look upon the face of god. when later on john tells us if you do you will surely die. also what you said was the man was ''bragging''. is this what genesis is just men bragging?
Again this was not God. nope genesis is more than just bragging. read it you will see. however would't u brag to have wrestled a spirit and lived to tell about it. i know i would. and u may have in a dream. dont think dreams r just dreams spirits of both sides can and will come to u. i dont know how u can say u dont believe when your whole life in itself is a miracle. so u have no feelings, u cant see, u cant even breath how can u. u dont even believe ur alive. u dont believe in nothing u believe in a void. a darkness so dark its scary to think about.


"The Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." - Judges 1:19

um this is WAR u do know what that is. Oh God could of wiped them clean however this was mans war. God was just with him not fighting for him. At this point in the war. the army was to great in number to be taken over by man. God was with him not doing it. to pick out a verse or two is just stupid. u do believe in the Bible thats why u try so hard to disapprove it. It scares that crap out of u. and it should satan himself is terrified--hes scared so bad hes trying to take as many souls with him as he can.


i like that... 'you believe in the bible and that's why you're trying to disprove it'. i don't really need to disprove it, it disproves itself by being such a contradictory, inconsistant work of man, with no inspiration of a god whatsoever.
''It scares the crap out of me''. well no it doesnt...im trying to say the bible is wrong, theres no salvation, no heaven etc. if i believe that the bible is wrong then i also don't believe in hell so therefore when i die there's nothing. why would i need to be scared of absolutly nothing. plus if there is heaven and hell im really not too worried where i go...hell might even be a laugh, afterall billions upon billions will be there according to you, so its not like ill be on my own

yelp u will be do u honestly think u will get to just roam around freely la la la doing nothing think again. noone will be there for u. no one its darkest fears ur worst of the worst nightmares u havent even begun to be scared.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
yelp u will be do u honestly think u will get to just roam around freely la la la doing nothing think again. noone will be there for u. no one its darkest fears ur worst of the worst nightmares u havent even begun to be scared.


it still doesnt sound that bad, sounds like it might just be similar to living in a horror movie...what's wrong with that?? heaven would be my nightmare, it's gonna be so boring up their your gonna wish you were a devil worshipper



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby

Originally posted by Shar
yelp u will be do u honestly think u will get to just roam around freely la la la doing nothing think again. noone will be there for u. no one its darkest fears ur worst of the worst nightmares u havent even begun to be scared.


it still doesnt sound that bad, sounds like it might just be similar to living in a horror movie...what's wrong with that?? heaven would be my nightmare, it's gonna be so boring up their your gonna wish you were a devil worshipper




well honestly if thats they way u feel theres nothing anyone can do for u. your soul is yours till u give it away. theres only two who can and will take it. personally i rather not live enternal life in fire. boring only what u bound. i dont see how it can possibly be boring. but close minded people will u know how they r. u know what i dont understand about most people. is its obvoious that theres good and bad. u have people who kill, steel, rob, rape, fight, hit, hurt children. and then u have people who give, and not fight, not steel, not rob, not rape, not hit, not hurt children. etccc.... where do u think these two very different forces come from. whats the voice inside of u that says dont do that. or help that person or kill that person. or steel that. umm these r spirits that u dont believe in yet u too have them.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 08:28 AM
link   
The problem with debating this subject is that there are few people that are truly objective in their research. Most people have something to prove either way.

What does everyone think about the books like Enoch and those inside the Nag Hammadi Library?

www.gnosis.org...

The Nag Hammadi library, I have heard, basically says that Jesus was not God and that many churches have outrightly condemned it because it is so "revolutionary" or "controversial" depending on which perspective you are coming from.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 08:53 AM
link   
im prety objective in my research, i find quotes all over that show the bible to be contradictory. then shar just starts telling me im going to hell and that im only trying to disprove the bible because i actualy subconciously believe in it. that doesnt seem too consructive nor does it seem very thought out. shar do some research then come back and show that there aren't as many contradictions, inconsistancies in the bible.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Okay, the you have established that the "Bible" is full of inconsistencies and differences between accounts.

Have you determined whether the writers THOUGHT they were telling the full truth--or at least--whether they INTENDED to tell the truth?

If they intended to tell the truth--THEIR TRUTH--then they framed the story to be "as consistent as possible" internally; but then it got mixed in with other authors and other details, and consistency fell off.

Where did the 39 authors of the Bible SAY they got their material? Moses said, "From a burning bush and in the cloud." He got ten commandments, one of which was "Thou shalt not murder."

And then Joshua took over Israel and began killing off people left and right.
Wait a minute. And Joshua told the People that God TOLD HIM to do that.

Is that an inconsistency you want to deal with -- or not?

Let's work on just that one.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't there a part in the bible where, I "think" it might be Moses....talking with god and god tell him he cannot see his face but he will let him see the ends of his robe...implying he is wearing clothing.......

Also, a sorcery is using the supernatural with the assistance of the spirit world......many, I'll even say most Witches don't...I stay clear of conjuring and see it as dangerous, un-necessary and foolish.
EIDT: I found it:


Then Moses said, "Now show me your glory." And the Lord said, "I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live."

Then the Lord said, "There is a place near me where you may stand on a rock. When my glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft in the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. Then I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen." Exodus 33:18-23




[edit on 1/4/2005 by LadyV]



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 11:48 AM
link   
The problems of describing a cosmic Being are positively loopey.

There's no WORD for Light Being that people commonly understand.

"Robe"? How does a Light Being wear a robe? I dunno.

Archives of UFO pictures are FULL of photos of ET Light Beings.

What is a shepherd supposed to say in describing a Being that makes no physical human sense?

Ezekiel had his problems with language, too. He saw more than he had words to string together to describe and make sense.

So, how can you expect any consistency or coherence, when the vocabulary for the entire phenomenon of meeting up with Cosmic Individuals hasn't been developed yet?

I don't get it.



posted on Jan, 4 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
im prety objective in my research, i find quotes all over that show the bible to be contradictory. then shar just starts telling me im going to hell and that im only trying to disprove the bible because i actualy subconciously believe in it. that doesnt seem too consructive nor does it seem very thought out. shar do some research then come back and show that there aren't as many contradictions, inconsistancies in the bible.



Look theres been alot of men playing with the words of the bible even from the very beginning. there is alot that has been took out that never should of been. mostly history which puts it altogether. but u should also note that there is bad writing as well good. two forces is writing and teaching. both wanting u. u have God with u always its only up to u weather u want him. the more u deny the farther u slip into the dark side. the less u will see and hear Him. everyone wants proof i see alot of proof that the scientest and christians and people in general leave out. once people starts really reading for instance the beginning books in the kjv they will learn of alot of things from the creation of man to the fall of man. however in between they will also learn how the angels fell and deceived man and ruled over him like god for years and years. with great power. even mythtolgy teaches this but to me its history more proof. when they conceived with woman they had children who were the gaints greater than the smallest one of 9 ft. the gaints were ruthless to us. mean dosnt even describe them. the structers that were built and still standing today is from the gaints era. look man is the one who fools with the bible and takes out stuff and twist the words around its hard for anyone to learn anything today the way the words have changed so much. but u cant deny theres good and bad. forces above your control. u can find these forces with ease and thousands and thousands have. u have those whose practice with the dark side and calls up spells etc....where do u think they get this from. not the wind. and u have those who just try to live right and peacefully. and they too fill a special force around them some call this the Holy Spirit. the point is no matter how much one trys to disaprove the Bible theres no dening the truth that theres a force (satan) trying to take u with him and a force (God) trying to take u. except God gave u a free will to make this decision. Yes Gods mad. u would be too if your children were kidnapped, taken away and showed sexual acts, showed someone killing someone in front of your child showed all the things you try to protect your young child from seeing. well this is what happen once satan takes us he shows us things God dosnt want us to see or do. yes it hurts him. Just put all knowledge together that u know from all your readings it will fit together. including myths. alot there is your history of the angels falling to earth and protraying themselves as gods. i did not want to upset u and sorry if i did.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join