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.

 

The Bible is open to interpretation, thus cannot be used as factual evidence

page: 7
1
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 02:44 PM
link   
The bible was written by MAN and there for prone to falibility (cant spell) and mistakes. As with any book you interprete what you want from it, if the bible is taken as pure gospel and to be believed wholy does that mean that books like the davinci code and other similer books are to be believed wholey?
YES the bible has alot of good advice in it but also has alot of stuff in it that is pure rubbish.

1 commandment says thou shalt not kill, well um why does it show in the bible the killing of many people and the crusades in the name of christianity.
people use religon as an excuse to kill people that dont agree with their beliefs, thats my opinion.

i agree the bible cannot be taken as FACT if you do then you must belive in santa claus as well cos he has been written about for hundreds of years aswell

and dont anyone please spout bible passages at me, i had enough of that from my dad



godness iv rambled sorry lol




posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ronishia
1 commandment says thou shalt not kill,


How are you. I trust this can be short, and if you need further info, you can review it in previous Posts in here I have offered.

According to the Commandment you note, we can answer your questions with ease, due to the Use of a Strong's Concordance.

Exodus 20:13 Thou shall not Kill Strongs # 7523 ratsach is a prime root meaning to dash to pieces, ie kill (a human being) as murder

Kill (used in this verse specifically) is in respects to an action, and in this case, it is to Murder. As to Lie in Wait.

Say, if you offeneded me, and I was to seek revenge by stalking you and slaughtering you. I broke a Commandment.

Now, Say you are walking down the street, and my Wheel Assembly broke and my vehilce swerved and crashed into you and you died, that just an accident. I still killed you, but it was not premeditated


Now, Say you served on a Jury, and I had killed 2 Police, and five citizens during a felony, and at my trial, the Death Penalty is being sought, My future with sparky, is not Killing, as outlined by the definition, of the word in the Original Hebrew. You'll have me killed, due to the sentance, but it is punishment for my crime.

As for the English word Kill, it is noted over 75 or 80 Times in the Old Testament, but ratsach in the Hebrew, is used only 4 times, from my search.

The other times,


Numbers 35:27 And the revenger of blood find him without the borders of
the city of his refuge, and the revenger of blood kill the
slayer; he shall not be guilty of blood:

Deut 4:42 That the slayer might flee thither, which should kill his
neighbour unawares, and hated him not in times past; and that
fleeing unto one of these cities he might live:

Deut 5:17 Thou shalt not kill.


The first two of these other examples, may see like contradiction, but within the context of the though being discussed, we find these are in reference to the Cities of Refuge, and examples of what can be expected.

A city of Refuge, is where I would have gone, after killing you by Accident. If I return to my Home city, prior to the Judge Dieing, and your brother seen me, he has the RIGHT and basically an OBLIGATION to Kill me on the Spot. I broke my conditions of Bail (used as and exmple only)

And then the Last time noted, is again the Commandment being reinforced or reminded during the instructions of Laws to the Israelites

To Kill in War is a different thing all to gether. Protection of life and liberty is a different thing. Self Defense is a different thing. The Death Penalty is a different thing.


and dont anyone please spout bible passages at me, i had enough of that from my dad

godness iv rambled sorry lol


Sorry, but I will not leave misleading quotes lie as they may. I hope this wasn't spouting, and can be viewed as a correction.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shane

To Kill in War is a different thing all to gether. Protection of life and liberty is a different thing. Self Defense is a different thing. The Death Penalty is a different thing.
Shane


fair enough this is your views but an accident is different from murder self defense? hmm technically your still killing someone ie excessive force etc.
as for the death penalty it is murder, you are still killing a human being out of choice. and when it comes to a war im sorry but its still murder, they are still going out there and killing thousands of innocent people. what if the war came to the UK or America would you call the thousands of deaths that would occur murder or would you condone it because its done in a war. Or would this death rate be chalked up a collatoral damage?
i respect your views on this and these are my views



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by ronishia

fair enough this is your views
i respect your views on this and these are my views


Thats for the Reply.

And no, thats just the View of the Bible. It's the Laws of Moses.

It has nothing to do with my views.

Have a good Day

Ciao

Shane



posted on Jun, 4 2006 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ronishia
The bible was written by MAN and there for prone to falibility (cant spell) and mistakes. As with any book you interprete what you want from it, if the bible is taken as pure gospel and to be believed wholy does that mean that books like the davinci code and other similer books are to be believed wholey?
YES the bible has alot of good advice in it but also has alot of stuff in it that is pure rubbish.

1 commandment says thou shalt not kill, well um why does it show in the bible the killing of many people and the crusades in the name of christianity.
people use religon as an excuse to kill people that dont agree with their beliefs, thats my opinion.

i agree the bible cannot be taken as FACT if you do then you must belive in santa claus as well cos he has been written about for hundreds of years aswell

and dont anyone please spout bible passages at me, i had enough of that from my dad



godness iv rambled sorry lol



how many times can people say this. if there was any killing done in the name of christianity after the ressurection to christ it was done by the antichrist movement. any war any killing anything that christ taught against and was done in his name is so obviously done with the backing of lucifer. just to easy to understand. christ taught love and life not death and destruction.

yep people have been killing people by the thousands while wearing a cross on thier back and are still doing it today. killing in the name of god. wow if you dont recongnize this as the spirit of the antichrist you are in need of some serious information. i thought that was pretty basic stuff. killing in the name of god or christ?? hahaha you mean you dont know who is behind that??


as far as santaclaus

people do not have the motivation to study and understand the bible so they depend on religous leaders to do that for them...by the time these guys have a few thousand years of fasle teachings just imagine what people now belive.... the population now calls christmas christs birthday and celebrate it with a fat guy in a red suit...talk about no knowlege of the bible....it insanity....and should i mention a rabbit hopping around hiding eggs??.....christ should have been warned us about such false prophets...oh wait he did.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   
how many times can people say this. if there was any killing done in the name of christianity after the ressurection to christ it was done by the antichrist movement. any war any killing anything that christ taught against and was done in his name is so obviously done with the backing of lucifer. just to easy to understand. christ taught love and life not death and destruction"



Imagine if there were no Bible as it exists today, but only the teachings of Christ.

I think this is the point so many people here are making, that the Bible is an algamation of so many differing and sometimes conflicting theologies, themes, and teachings that any viewpoint can be obtained and action justified.

People put together the Bible, not god. its human to make mistakes, and mistakes were made. Christ did not have anywhere near the input to create Christianity as Paul did, this is ridiculous. Why do we need someone else to interpret what Christ commanded? its pretty simple language.
I beleive that as humanity continues to examine the Bible we will begin to see more cracks appear, more thoelogians will arrive at the conclusions being discussed on this thread;
The Bible contains salvation as well as mistakes and errors that must be avoided.



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shortness

Isn't it a fact that Jesus is the Lamb of God?



The two verses in John are the only references other than the book of Revelation to use the term "Lamb of God". Those in Revelations are, as are most verses in the book, very obscure in their meaning... and, in all due respect, your interpretation may very well not be the "REAL" one.

Of course, the KJV does make it easy for us, capitalizing any words used for Jesus or god (and, incidently David)-- making it simple for even the DIMMEST Christian to tell who Jesus is between two different verses; example:



"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
Revelation 13:8


VERSUS



"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon."
Revelation 13:11



Then, yes... I can see how one could be very confident in their interpretation of the "Lamb of God". I'd like to point out, Shortness, that not all of the bible is this 'cut-and-dry' easy to understand.


Since we're already delving into Revelations, I'll use this as an example. Now, I want you, Shortness... to tell me what this means and only you:



"Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God. "
Revelation 19:7-9



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shortness
The fact that the most of the New Testament writers were all under intense persecution and most died for thier written testimony and faith is important.

Think about it, would you die for something if it was a lie?

I don't know. Let's ask Adolf.

Hey, Adolf! Do you think all those millions of soldiers of yours who got killed thought that business about the German people being a superior race was all a load of hogwash?


Nein!



posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by toolman
how many times can people say this. if there was any killing done in the name of christianity after the ressurection to christ it was done by the antichrist movement. any war any killing anything that christ taught against and was done in his name is so obviously done with the backing of lucifer. just to easy to understand. christ taught love and life not death and destruction"





Imagine if there were no Bible as it exists today, but only the teachings of Christ.

now that would be confusing to people. make it simple and they go nuts. if the only teachings on this planet was christs teachings you would still have to prove that he taught it to some.



I think this is the point so many people here are making, that the Bible is an algamation of so many differing and sometimes conflicting theologies, themes, and teachings that any viewpoint can be obtained and action justified.

People put together the Bible, not god. its human to make mistakes, and mistakes were made. Christ did not have anywhere near the input to create Christianity as Paul did, this is ridiculous. Why do we need someone else to interpret what Christ commanded? its pretty simple language.
I beleive that as humanity continues to examine the Bible we will begin to see more cracks appear, more thoelogians will arrive at the conclusions being discussed on this thread;
The Bible contains salvation as well as mistakes and errors that must be avoided.


i think mankind along witht he help of lucifer has taken christs teachings and twisted them so bad that it has become "christianity" just another religion that christ warned us about. man created "christianity." most of christs true teachings are being left out. especially in the main "christianity" religions...you say the bible contains salvation for mankind? can you tell me what that is? dont give me the basic stuff please but you can if you want to.







[edit on 5-6-2006 by Funkydung]



posted on Jun, 6 2006 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Enkidu
I don't know. Let's ask Adolf.

Hey, Adolf! Do you think all those millions of soldiers of yours who got killed thought that business about the German people being a superior race was all a load of hogwash?


Nein!



BEST POST.... EVER!!!



[edit on 6/6/2006 by Draconica]



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Imagine you had to write down a description of a movie you saw only once. Now imagine another person watched the same movie, and had to write down their description after watching it only once also. What do you think the chances are that you will both write down the same description? To complicate things, imagine you were both also required to define the meaning of the movie. Would you both come to the same conclusion? If not, would either of you be wrong?



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Isnt Sicence open until interpretation with some of there theorys?



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
can't anyone realize that religion is personal philosophy used to explain the unexplainable (at least at the time of the religion's conception)?

thor and zeus were made to explain thunder and lightning
the creation myths in genesis (yes, there are 2, read closely), were used to show that god loves the universe.

the bible is spiritual, not scientific
unless you're in a theological or philosophical argument don't use a religious text as proof (unless your religion is based solely on empirical evidence)



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mytym
Imagine you had to write down a description of a movie you saw only once. Now imagine another person watched the same movie, and had to write down their description after watching it only once also. What do you think the chances are that you will both write down the same description? To complicate things, imagine you were both also required to define the meaning of the movie. Would you both come to the same conclusion? If not, would either of you be wrong?


There would be very little chance of an exact written description.

It is possible that both parties may come to a similar general conclusion.
It is also quite possible for each party to come to fairly disimilar conclusions.

The meanings that either of the individuals derive from the movie may not comform to the intended meaning the movies' creators sought to express.
It is quite possible that both parties may be wrong from the point of view of the movie creators'.
However if the film was intended to be left open to interpretation, from the point of view of the movies' creators, no interpretation would be wrong.


[edit on 10-6-2006 by point]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 07:25 AM
link   
ONe of the most direct admonitions in the bible, and the foundation of what Christ taught; Matthew 25:31-46



Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me.' Then these righteous ones will reply, 'Lord, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you something to drink? Or a stranger and show you hospitality? Or naked and give you clothing? When did we ever see you sick or in prison, and visit you?' And the King will tell them, 'I assure you, when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were doing it to me!'



Then the admonition continues ;
’Go away from me, with your curse upon you, to the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his agents. For I was hungry and you never gave me food; I was thirsty and you never gave me anything to drink; I was a stranger and you never made me welcome, naked and you never clothed me, sick and in prison and you never visited me.’ Then it will be their turn to ask, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty, a stranger…and did not come to your help?’ Then he will answer, ‘I tell you solemnly, in so far as you neglected to do this to one of the last of these, you neglected to do it to me.’ And they will go away to eternal punishment, and the virtuous to eternal life.


This is as simple and to the point as the teachings of Christ get. Unfortunately they were corrupted by paul, and the rest of the books added into what became the Bible.



posted on Jun, 23 2006 @ 05:59 PM
link   
A still painting is probably an ever greater example of the existence of interpretation. Just look at how many different views on the meaning behind them come about. One solitary still image exists that is able to be viewed over and over again for as long as required, yet a multitude of diverse interpretations exist in regards to the meaning behind it!



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 10:52 PM
link   
I find it interesting watching this thread. In parts quite amusing.

But seriously, how can it be said that killing another man in the name of god is acceptable? Really!?!? How is it possible. No-one has ever had the right to appove killing another man for whatever reason.

I believe that in some situations it would be necessary to do something like that, but does it make it right? no it certainly does not. Whether it is self defense, self preservation, or for defending your liberty (whetever the hell that is supposed to mean!) it is simply not an act that can be done in the name of god, for any reason.

I am not a religious person, but I do believe the ideas and thoughts behind christianity are long gone. It seems there is corruption and disinformation in every corner of the earth, people out to get as much as they can as quick as they can, not showing anything for fellow man, you need only look as far as other threads on this site alone to get some idea of what I am talking about.

it is not impossible to undo things that have come to pass, but people these days are lazy. They would rather turn to someone else telling them what they want to hear, rather than lookin inside their souls to find what is reality and truthy for them. Because when it comes down to it, no matter where your belifs come from, reality is only real for you, and you can create your own reality however you see fit.

We all know what is right and what is wrong regardless of our belief. If your too lazy to do the right thing, or can't find your own true self inside you and need others to say what you feel, then I feel for you. it will be a hard road. but just remember, it can be changed at any miniute of any day, if your ready to do it.

There is no spoon.
M@



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Beware of absolute statements!

I think that there is rarely, if ever, a time when one can deem an absolute rule, law or guideline to be appropriate in all circumstances. Different situations require different actions, and most, if not all actions, can be both the right thing and wrong thing to do at given points in time, in my opinion.



posted on Mar, 16 2007 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mytym
Some argue that the Bible requires no interpretation, and can be taken literally. If this is your belief that is fine, but please do not make any
interpretations or assumptions to explain the passage when using it to
support a point of view.


I don't think it is people who are taking it literally who are the ones applying assumptions and interpretations.

I think the people who are making assumptions and interpretations of it are not comprehending what it is.

Do exactly what it is the bible says to do, and then the literacy of it may just be understood.

The bible is not the one in error, it is beings who are subserviant slaves to the cellular prime directive of being self pre- serve aka selfish before they serve anything or anyone who are not capable of integrating knowledge that exists outside the realm of the expectations provided by their own selfish nature.



posted on Mar, 17 2007 @ 12:06 AM
link   
this is simply just not true.



The Bible is open to interpretation, thus cannot be used as factual evidence


not true. The bible is open to interpretation only by people who are extending their will outwards upon it. As for factual evidence, if people were paying attention to the words and what they are saying, the factual evidence is without limits.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join