The Bible is not the word of god

page: 28
2
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   


At any rate seeing as how my latest question relates DIRECTLY to the thread title, I'd say that makes it pretty relevant.


It doesn't relate directly to the thread title at all. Your argument's are based off of my arguments. The argument's I raised over the fact that the Christians changed the meaning's of words and verses to make it appear as if Jesus was the Messiah. This is evident in your second post.



How about this, I'll write my own scripture entitled, the sentence according to mytym, chapter 1,verse 1: "Jesus is the Messiah." Now I'll use this scripture to prove that Jesus is the Messiah.


This is clearly following along a similar path of previous discussion and point's I was raising and in no way is directly related to the thread topic. Which is still evident the further we go on down the discussion between you and I. You don't raise any point's as to why the bible isn't the word of god.


Out of this thread for a day or two to "calm down". You can reach me via U2U you if wish to continue this with me.

[EDIT] This'll give me a chance to make a proper more well thought out argument against anything that will be claimed after this anyways. This is a good thing.


[edit on 20-3-2006 by Produkt]

[edit on 20-3-2006 by Produkt]




posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Exactly Produkt

Won't argue the Point, Jesus is the Way The Truth & The Life!
Some Day All Shall See & Know! You have the right to believe the way you want!
I know My Bible In Full Thank You! If You read it, You will See The Scriptures about Our Lord & Savior Jesus!
I'm not going to quote you the scriptures, you need to seek & find for yourself, believe me their in there!

[edit on 20-3-2006 by AngelWings9999]

[edit on 20-3-2006 by AngelWings9999]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by AngelWings9999
The Bible says, Test Every Word And See If It Is True! As It Also Says Test All Spirits As Well! If You Ask it shall be given unto you, seek & you shall find! He Will Prove It To You, All You Need To Do Is Ask God!
Man will never give you the answers you seek, only God Can! But note, No Man can go to the Father, except through Jesus!


Where do I start with this one?

Ok, let's test the "word."

Bible says that rabbits chew their cud. If I have to explain the absurdity of this assertion to you...let's just leave it at that.

Bible says world was created in 6 days, universe in one day. Again, see above statement. A planet and its life forms are created in 6 days, but an entire universe is created in 1 day?


Bible says plants are created before the sun is. Again, see 1st statement.

Bible says one day the stars will fall to Earth. Once again, 1st statement. No, let's go further. Not only is it absurd to say that stars much larger than the earth will fall to the earth, but it's absurd to say that stars that are already dead will fall to Earth. Seriously, how many "stars" do we see are actually dead, but are so far away that their light is just now hitting us?

And if you say light speed is bogus...


And if you say that the physicists and the various equations they use to calculate light speed are wrong AND your ONE dusty old book is right...


In the bible, god talks to people and commands them to do various things. Now, the only person god talks to is prez Bush.


The bible condones slavery (I made a thread about this that is now in BTS).

The bible says that water can magically turn into blood. Please see 1st statement, and if you have no idea how complex blood is compared to water, read up on it.

The bible says that God has a "chosen people." Either God is a racist or the bible is wrong again. Obviously, God's not a racist (can't speak for the Christian god, though
), so the bible has to be wrong and not the word of God.

Bible says that a man once stopped the sun. Please, PLEASE see the 1st statement on this one.


Bible says that god sent 2 bears to maul kids that were making fun of a bald guy that god liked. Well, the Christian god is a pure sadist to me, so I guess you got me on this one!



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 03:31 AM
link   
People who don't believe in God usually don't belive the Bible and often vice versa. So all 28 pages of this post has been nothing more than folks claiming what they believe.

I have yet to see how someone's religous belief = conspiracy. Should have gone to BTS 20 pages ago.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 08:49 AM
link   
I find it fascinating that some look at the Bible and ask the book to prove itself as the word of God, as if the book will fly up into the air and say, "I am the word of God!" If this is your expectation, then most likely you're leading yourself to disappointment.

The book describes God and the things that occur below Him. To know if the Book is His word, I'd recommend one of two things.

1.) Seek God, when found ask Him. Need help finding God? Send U2U.

2.) Test the book. As Paul says, "Test everything". How? Not by trying to determine if rabbits chew their cud or whatever ridiculous arguement that comes thereof, but rather do as it recommends. For example, the book of Matthew has a lot of great advice. Try following some of it sometime. More than likely you'll find it is the right way to think and do things. Pray. Train. Study.

[edit on 21-3-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   
And when one does test the Christian bible, it becomes clear as day that their bible is not the word of god and far from divine inspiration. The Christian Messiah goes into full contradiction of the Jewish prophecies it relies upon. You can compare many verses in the OT compared to what Jesus claims of himself and God. Like Paul says, test test test.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
And when one does test the Christian bible, it becomes clear as day that their bible is not the word of god and far from divine inspiration. The Christian Messiah goes into full contradiction of the Jewish prophecies it relies upon. You can compare many verses in the OT compared to what Jesus claims of himself and God. Like Paul says, test test test.


Did you even read my post? Fine, I'll cut & paste the most relevant part then:


2.) Test the book. As Paul says, "Test everything". How? Not by trying to determine if rabbits chew their cud or whatever ridiculous arguement that comes thereof, but rather do as it recommends. For example, the book of Matthew has a lot of great advice. Try following some of it sometime. More than likely you'll find it is the right way to think and do things. Pray. Train. Study.


By the way, there are many who have accepted your challenge and disagree wholeheartedly. That's not what I'm here to show though. I'm here, per my post, to explain that there is a way without studying history to find out if the Bible is the word of God.


[edit on 21-3-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   


I'm here, per my post, to explain that there is a way without studying history to find out if the Bible is the word of God.


No where do I imply looking at it through history. I clearly said reading the book itself. Comparing the Christian New Testament with the Jewish Old Testament, it's quiet obvious the Christian Testament is no of divine inpiration, let alone the word of god. The NT is quiet obviously the word of man, especially when you get into history. But like I said, one doesn't have to necessarily do that to see this, but it does validate the evidence in the book itself.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
No where do I imply looking at it through history.


Old Testament versus New Testament. History. I've never seen anyone suddenly believe by doing so. Who has found God by saying the New Testament matches the Old and therefore I believe in God? Though this is true, it hasn't made any believers I've met.


Originally posted by Prot0n
I clearly said reading the book itself. Comparing the Christian New Testament with the Jewish Old Testament, it's quiet obvious the Christian Testament is no of divine inpiration, let alone the word of god.


Then I think you may have skipped a few books such as Isaiah and Daniel. There's plenty of others but again I have to wonder what the point is to those who do not believe.


Originally posted by Prot0n
The NT is quiet obviously the word of man, especially when you get into history.


Get into the what? As I've said.


Originally posted by Prot0n
But like I said, one doesn't have to necessarily do that to see this, but it does validate the evidence in the book itself.


I'd like to meet someone here who got their proof by alone reading the Book.

[edit on 21-3-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkelf
People who don't believe in God usually don't belive the Bible and often vice versa. So all 28 pages of this post has been nothing more than folks claiming what they believe.

I have yet to see how someone's religous belief = conspiracy. Should have gone to BTS 20 pages ago.


That's bogus.

You're assuming that one cannot believe in God without believing in the bible. Totally bogus. But, again, that just goes along with the extreme arrogance of Christians.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   


Old Testament versus New Testament. History. I've never seen anyone suddenly believe by doing so. Who has found God by saying the New Testament matches the Old and therefore I believe in God? Though this is true, it hasn't made any believers I've met.


Technically, the NT and OT do not match up. For proof of this, read them both. No where have I lead you to think that reading the bible would bring about believer's just from reading. I've clearly stated that by reading both the OT and NT, it become's quiet evident that the bible in whole, is not the word of god and is not of divine inspiration.




Then I think you may have skipped a few books such as Isaiah and Daniel. There's plenty of others but again I have to wonder what the point is to those who do not believe.


I have read them both. Have you bothered to read Isaiah 52 before you read Isaiah 53? I'm most certain this is the chapter your implying.




Get into the what? As I've said.


I'm not sure what you mean here. Clarify and I can properly answer.




I'd like to meet someone here who got their proof by alone reading the Book.


I'm still not sure where your figuring I'm discussing that reading the bible can make one a believer. I clearly stated that reading the OT and NT (and on a side note: researching the history of the NT and it's many change's), one can see quiet clearly that this book isn't the word of god or of divine inspiration.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
Technically, the NT and OT do not match up. For proof of this, read them both.


If one read Genesis and Revelation only, then I think you have a case.


Originally posted by Prot0n
No where have I lead you to think that reading the bible would bring about believer's just from reading.


I didn't say I was led to thinking it, I'm saying that declaring the Bible valid without knowing who God is is not possible for people like us. If I wrote a letter and you did not know me, how could you determine I wrote it? Likewise saying it's bunk without knowing God is equally bunk.


Originally posted by Prot0n
I've clearly stated that by reading both the OT and NT, it become's quiet evident that the bible in whole, is not the word of god and is not of divine inspiration.


From Job to Malachi, it should be evident. These are the books that show a progression and foretelling. I doubt the moderators would appreciate me posting 250 pages here, but in there it does become quite evident that the Bible in whole is the Word of God and is of divine inspiration. The gospels are the icing on the cake. There are over 330 prophecies within them that came true. That is to say, something that was foretold and did happen. I'm not here to teach that four month Bible study course, but I know of a place that does. Bend the spine, read the book. If it's not enough evidence for you, then ask God Himself.


Originally posted by Prot0n
I have read them both. Have you bothered to read Isaiah 52 before you read Isaiah 53? I'm most certain this is the chapter your implying.


Ya. I'm not implying one thing. I'm stating there are several several things though care not to nit-pick over each one since it is futile to argue and causes no-one to suddenly believe. We're people requiring proof, and we can get our personal proof. Don't ask about mine, it won't convince anyone, rather it is certainly possible to obtain your own. In which case, you will tell others and they will get to scoff and call you looney. Nevertheless, I can and will help those who are truly interested in obtaining theirs.


Originally posted by Prot0n
I'm not sure what you mean here. Clarify and I can properly answer.


You'd said you didn't imply history, but in your last post you clearly said get into the history. I was hoping via juxtapositioning you'd see where you yourself had said so.


Originally posted by Prot0n
I'm still not sure where your figuring I'm discussing that reading the bible can make one a believer. I clearly stated that reading the OT and NT (and on a side note: researching the history of the NT and it's many change's), one can see quiet clearly that this book isn't the word of god or of divine inspiration.


Per above statement about needing to know who God is before determining His words.


[edit on 21-3-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 04:38 PM
link   
how can one book be the only true religious scripture, when religion is something that cannot be tested.

show me several examples of how the bible, when tested, is a true document, and maybe i'll take it more seriously.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 04:53 PM
link   


If one read Genesis and Revelation only, then I think you have a case.


Not quiet. The Christian NT relies upon the Jewish OT for the NT's Messiah. But, reading the OT & NT it become's quiet evident that the NT's Messiah doesn't match up with the OT's version of the Messiah. If both book's matched up then we wouldn't be seeing all these blatant contradiction's between both books. NT being the newest addition to the bible.




From Job to Malachi, it should be evident. These are the books that show a progression and foretelling. I doubt the moderators would appreciate me posting 250 pages here, but in there it does become quite evident that the Bible in whole is the Word of God and is of divine inspiration. The gospels are the icing on the cake. There are over 330 prophecies within them that came true. That is to say, something that was foretold and did happen. I'm not here to teach that four month Bible study course, but I know of a place that does. Bend the spine, read the book. If it's not enough evidence for you, then ask God Himself.


Both of those book's are from the OT. Despite prophecies comming true or not, the OT's god is abit different then the NT's god. And seeing as how I'm comparing the bible (OT & NT) as a whole, with the out right contradiction's of the NT, it's still quiet evident that the bible was a whole is not of divine inspiration, nor the word of god. Can you prove god literally had authorship of the bible? No, god 'supposedly', through divine inspiration, had men (people like me and you) write the book on his behalf. This does little to prove the book is of god, all we're working off of is the claims of the author's of these books.




Ya. I'm not implying one thing. I'm stating there are several several things though care not to nit-pick over each one since it is futile to argue and causes no-one to suddenly believe. We're people requiring proof, and we can get our personal proof. Don't ask about mine, it won't convince anyone, rather it is certainly possible to obtain your own. In which case, you will tell others and they will get to scoff and call you looney. Nevertheless, I can and will help those who are truly interested in obtaining theirs.


Why would you bring up Isaiah 53, claim to have read both 53 & 52, then go on about some need for 'personal' proof. What exactly was your purpose for bringing up Isaiah 53?




You'd said you didn't imply history, but in your last post you clearly said get into the history. I was hoping via juxtapositioning you'd see where you yourself had said so.


Really? Let's disect this issue with the relevent quote's.

Here's where you quoted me, following that with a statement about history.


ME
And when one does test the Christian bible, it becomes clear as day that their bible is not the word of god and far from divine inspiration. The Christian Messiah goes into full contradiction of the Jewish prophecies it relies upon. You can compare many verses in the OT compared to what Jesus claims of himself and God. Like Paul says, test test test.



You
I'm here, per my post, to explain that there is a way without studying history to find out if the Bible is the word of God.


Did you notice how I said nothing, nor implied using history against the bible? This was originally of your own doing, and yet your placing this on me entirely.

The statement I made following your post (this is where your getting that I denied implying history)



No where do I imply looking at it through history.


Going from those two starting point's, I did indeed not imply history, you were the first to bring this up.




Per above statement about needing to know who God is before determining His words.


Well see, we're hitting a big problem here. Your god, the Jewish god, the christian god, the ancient egyptian gods, the hindu gods? Which god(s) do we need to know before we can know anything truefully in the religous sense? Every religion and every person of faith will whole heartedly defend that their god(s) are/is the truth.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
What is "God?"

I really don't think you can give credit to this thing, this "god," until you can properly define it. Otherwise, what exactly are you trying to prove?




posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
how can one book be the only true religious scripture,


Actually it's a collection of books spanning thousands of years.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
when religion is something that cannot be tested.


It sure can.


Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
show me several examples of how the bible, when tested, is a true document, and maybe i'll take it more seriously.


We'll start with just one then. "And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself." (Matthew 22:39)

One drop of water in a pool of wisdom. How do we test this? Though it sounds easy, it's actually quite hard. In our most severe anger and hate, can we dissipate that immediately and do as it is written here? Not easy at all, but with practice it becomes easier. If you get this down, you have 50% of all the rules and regulations the Bible lists down pat. Let us test this one part of the Bible to see if it sounds. After that, if you are ambitious to go the full 100%, then proof would be forthcoming. Those who says it is wrong or does not work, please let's discuss.

[edit on 21-3-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Firstly, madnessinmysoul,

Sorry to reply on your behalf.

Saint,




Actually it's a collection of books spanning thousands of years.


I don't think there's really any need to take her/his words out of context and apply a new meaning to them. The bible is a book in whole. All the books written in the span of thousands of years make up the end result of this book we call a bible. Given that, one can correctly refer to the bible in it's whole as one book. Just as God refers to the Jewish nation in the singular pronoun on many occasions.




It sure can.


Provide one experiment that can prove your religion out of 100's, possibly thousand's that say their prophecies have also come true given by their god(s).




We'll start with just one then. "And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself." (Matthew 22:39)

One drop of water in a pool of wisdom. How do we test this? Though it sounds easy, it's actually quite hard. In our most severe anger and hate, can we dissipate that immediately and do as it is written here? Not easy at all, but with practice it becomes easier. If you get this down, you have 50% of all the rules and regulations the Bible lists down pat. Let us test this one part of the Bible to see if it sounds. Those who says it is wrong or does not work, please let's discuss.


Honestly, this does nothing to prove the bible is a true document when tested in it's entirety. All we're seeing here is proof of the obvious. Ideally, one should love another as one love's him/her; self. And your correct, in practice (at first) this isn't as easy as it sounds for many different reason's. But given due time, it can get easier, just as anything else one puts enough devotion and practice into. All in all however, this prove's merely a philosophical thought and not the validity of a written document.

[edit on 21-3-2006 by Prot0n]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
Not quiet. The Christian NT relies upon the Jewish OT for the NT's Messiah. But, reading the OT & NT it become's quiet evident that the NT's Messiah doesn't match up with the OT's version of the Messiah. If both book's matched up then we wouldn't be seeing all these blatant contradiction's between both books. NT being the newest addition to the bible.


There's no point in either of us being repetitious.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Both of those book's are from the OT. Despite prophecies comming true or not, the OT's god is abit different then the NT's god.


Sorry you feel that way. The God of the Old and New Testament are one, merciful yet just (meaning justice). That you can find from Genesis to Revelation so I sit corrected saying it's not readily apparent in the first and last book.


Originally posted by Prot0n
And seeing as how I'm comparing the bible (OT & NT) as a whole, with the out right contradiction's of the NT, it's still quiet evident that the bible was a whole is not of divine inspiration, nor the word of god. Can you prove god literally had authorship of the bible?


That'd be a result of a sit-down chat, person to God. I can't have that conversation for anyone. Well, I could but I wouldn't want to nor would it be considered acceptable as proven by this thread.


Originally posted by Prot0n
No, god 'supposedly', through divine inspiration, had men (people like me and you) write the book on his behalf.


He did write some himself, but we broke it. Had to go back up and get another copy. Don't know about you, but when you give someone a precious gift and they immediately break it, what is your impression of their responsibility and respect?


Originally posted by Prot0n
This does little to prove the book is of god, all we're working off of is the claims of the author's of these books.


There's no need to do that, you can dial direct. The lines are open and the Operator is standing by.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Why would you bring up Isaiah 53, claim to have read both 53 & 52, then go on about some need for 'personal' proof. What exactly was your purpose for bringing up Isaiah 53?


I didn't, you did. Please review posts.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Really? Let's disect this issue with the relevent quote's.

Here's where you quoted me, following that with a statement about history.



Did you notice how I said nothing, nor implied using history against the bible? This was originally of your own doing, and yet your placing this on me entirely.

The statement I made following your post (this is where your getting that I denied implying history)




No where do I imply looking at it through history.


Going from those two starting point's, I did indeed not imply history, you were the first to bring this up.


ad infinitum, ad nauseum. I said the word history first yes, but you were talking about a historical contrast between Old and New when all any of us are really interested in is Right Now determining if God does exist. To which I say "YES" but you ain't gonna get no proof to your satisfaction from the Book. Find God, then you'll know Him well enough to determine if this Book is His word. For some people the Book is enough and I find it remarkable that some people can find truth so quickly, but for people like you and I (and many on ATS) the process is as outlined here.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Well see, we're hitting a big problem here. Your god, the Jewish god, the christian god, the ancient egyptian gods, the hindu gods? Which god(s) do we need to know before we can know anything truefully in the religous sense?


The truth is spoken here, yet denied. It is not my job to convince anyone.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Every religion and every person of faith will whole heartedly defend that their god(s) are/is the truth.


Every religion and every person is not my responsibility. My responsibility is the relaying of the truth and helping those who want proof to get it. If others find that unexceptable then it is beyond my control.


[edit on 21-3-2006 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu
What is "God?"

I really don't think you can give credit to this thing, this "god," until you can properly define it. Otherwise, what exactly are you trying to prove?



The Book proves a very good description of who God is and how He relates to us. I'll send a copy at my expense if anyone wishes to read.



posted on Mar, 21 2006 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n
I don't think there's really any need to take her/his words out of context and apply a new meaning to them. The bible is a book in whole. All the books written in the span of thousands of years make up the end result of this book we call a bible. Given that, one can correctly refer to the bible in it's whole as one book. Just as God refers to the Jewish nation in the singular pronoun on many occasions.


This implications of the statement was that is was only one book by one author. This is not the case in the collection of books in the Book, also called The Bible. Also, the Bible does not claim to be God en totale. In fact it says the opposite. That God is living, present, and we can have a personal relationship with Him as a great source of guidance.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Provide one experiment that can prove your religion out of 100's, possibly thousand's that say their prophecies have also come true given by their god(s).


No use experimenting when you already have the results. They're documented already in the same Book we're discussing. Any meddling on my part would put more "human" factor in the equation so I'd rather those who are interested go to the source.


Originally posted by Prot0n
Honestly, this does nothing to prove the bible is a true document when tested in it's entirety.


I did not claim this test would prove the Bible. Many tests may lead to a conclusion which can help. Per my many statements to the effect, we need to find God to know who God is and whether or not these are His words.


Originally posted by Prot0n
All we're seeing here is proof of the obvious. Ideally, one should love another as one love's him/her; self. And your correct, in practice (at first) this isn't as easy as it sounds for many different reason's. But given due time, it can get easier, just as anything else one puts enough devotion and practice into. All in all however, this prove's merely a philosophical thought and not the validity of a written document.


Ah, so it does work. Test #1 Complete. Thank you. Shall we continue with more? Or, should we just skip to the end and work on establishing a working relationship with God?





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join