It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Questions about the Bible

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 01:27 PM
by the way fremason,if you dont belive in GOD (and you have stated this in a previous post,to me) how can you belive HE is evil?or as you call HIM satan?(hope its not overcast where your at
or even that HE preformed miracles ?
really my friend,take time to watch where you spit, you have spittel on your chin.

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 03:03 PM
as i say i have no problems with a persons religion but i am intrigued as to why someone so young should change his so many times.who made you believe your religion needed a title.......isnt religion supposed to be the way you live your life.........what did you do differently
as an agnostic having rejected christianity?.........humans are social animals we gather in groups and our best emotions and feelings are felt when we are having fun..........what exactly do you think goes through a buddist monks head when a pretty girl smiles at him in the street?his religion forbids sexual contact but can it forbid him thinking about it?i doubt it..... hes a human following his religious beliefs hes denying his own human instinct and so will reach enlightenment...........its also puzzled me for years how anyone who has to say forgive me father every week can claim to be following any sort of religion at all..........i dont feel the need to accept or believe in any of them unlike some who do both or others that do one or the other........if people need to believe in something to be content and happy then fine......when that something is used as an excuse for war and to make people fearful then questions have got to be asked about the religions origin and why throughtout history has it been used as a tool to control the will of the people who follow it.

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 03:30 PM
TC what you say is so important. That is until one takes into consideration, anything having to do with space and time. What wrong TC have you not earned you wings?

OK lets accept a man who denied the basis for the fundamentalist ethic. Lets accept a person who thought Mary Magdalene was worth the trouble. And let's accept someone who was a mystic.

Is there anything else you see as relevant in relation to what we should accept?

Of course this not in relation to the issue of Jesus being a son of God (this I already see as relevant).

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 07:52 PM
I wouldn't say that Christianity is inherently evil. I believe that any form of religion can be dangerous, if some of the followers are ultra-conservative and want to declare war on other religions. Religion can only be constructive if it instills a desire to help people instead of hurting people, and if it instills a desire to lead more fulfilling lives and find peace.

Yes, humans are social animals. For example, feelings of sadness and loneliness plague those who lose friends or close family members, those who make plans that don't work out, etc. I personally don't understand why someone would deny themselves basic human instincts in order to reach any kind of enlightenment (monks, nuns...). If it is natural to feel certain emotions and have certain behaviors, then why deny it? That is just my opinion though, I guess.

I have been following liberal Christian beliefs for a while. It has come to my attention that some liberal kinds of Christianity view Jesus as not actually being the Son of God. Basically, the entire Bible is to be interpreted symbolically. Isn't the Christian religion based on the belief that Jesus is the Son of God though? That is an issue.

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 09:00 PM
Back to the topic and away from the rabid ranting of some posts previous....

I like the NIV it is a good study bible...

I have concerns about the KJV at a personal level...

Its a bible favored among cults, and wacko offshoots. Why? I suspect because of the old language it is easy to lose the 'love' from the words and be left with orders.

Its easy to be legalistic with the KJV...

Also because its harder for us to understnad you either have to be a real scholar or rely on someone else to tell you what the verses mean.

posted on Nov, 3 2002 @ 10:42 PM
Hi PM,
About your original question - I also recommend the NIV. I had an NIV Student Bible - has lots of neat little facts and descriptions of people, places, and culture of biblical times to give you a better understanding of it. I believe the Bible is the word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit. It's great to know you are looking to the true source to figure out your beliefs, and not believing things just because someone else says to!

I went through a similar search when I was a teen. Growing up, I was taught ABOUT God, rather than how to KNOW God. I didn't get the full impact of all the biblical stories and teachings until I realized that God really does love me just as I am, unconditionally, to the point of sending his son Jesus to wipe the slate of my life clean through his death on the cross. Never in my life has someone willingly died for me!! I gave my life to the Lord when i was 15. Now almost 8 years later, I look back and do not regret my decision to search for the truth.

Because the Bible covers just about every topic of living, it is a vast book and you will run into scripture you may not "get". This is where having reference books comes in handy. The original Hebrew and Greek languages are so much more descriptive than plain English - many words don't have an English counterpart, so translators just had to do the best they could. Do ask for help from people who have a good understanding of the Bible. When you are sincerely looking for understanding, God will show you the way.

I wish you the best and hope your faith grows mightily .

"The truth is out there"!!!

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 08:44 AM
Wow, I have to admit there are some quite remarkable posts on this thread. Everything from Hebrew 101 to All Christians are fascists and must die. This is pretty cool.
phunky, everybody has their own choice on the Bible, and Religion, I say read the Bible with an open heart, ponder it, then do as it says in James 1:5 Ask God. We can all tell you this and that, our point of views etc, but what good will that really do? Christ said "knock and it shall be opened" many times, so, Ask Him in faith after giving it some thought and listen to your heart. Sounds absurd I know, but it's better than listening to the "All Christians are worshipping Satan!" routine.
Oh yeah, be careful of those cults, be careful also what is defined as a cult, some will tell "Heh that man is in a cult!" And be WAY off the mark. That's what we get for relying too much on our own brains instead of "revelation" from the One True and Living God.
Adios, que le vaya bien.

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 09:07 AM
Well, there you are, through this Mulligan's stew of spam-for-bucks, some words worth at least a second before "Delete".
You have some good personal theology from the regular sages; you have Estragon who has striven to show you that a sound knowledge of Hebrew triliterals, Greek participles and the intricacies of the canonical tradition are never any more than various shades of knowledge.
The Estragon challenge as ever applies on language. But I'd never do more than suggest what -on grounds I'd declare in a scholarly manner - you should not believe. What you do believe is between (a) Your God and you (b) a private choice.
If you want a reasonable treatment of the meaning of a verse - I and others are your man/woman/person (harrummph).
If you want to know what's true: therein the patient must minister to himself.
This thread is as suspect as anything else on Religion: but I'd go with blahblahblah: read, learn, think and follow your heart.

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 09:11 AM
you'll notice that the general indifference- on this benighted forum - to Estragon's posts concerning matters of linguistic or thelogical substance, is in itself no small clue.

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 11:37 AM
I just got something called 'The NIV Study Bible'. It has lots of study notes. You brought up an interesting point about the KJV Bible Netchicken. It may be the same reason why the Church of Rome didn't want the Bible to be translated from Latin into the languages we have today.

I agree with what you said Estragon. It should all be a personal choice. The 'There is no God but Allah' chants of Islam and the 'fire and brimstone' sermons or Christianity are quite rude.

Yes, there are some very strong opinions here blahblahblah! Very preachy on some topics. Just out of curiousity, are you same blahblahblah that visits another message board that I go to sometimes?

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 12:16 PM
You can't go wrong with the NIV.

I use that as my "what does this verse really mean" bible. It should include a concordance as well,which is indespensable.

I also use a couple of modern translations as well. ... "The Message" is great, just to read and get the flavor for what has been written, it flows so well that you end up reading like you would with a novel. I enjoy it.

Sometimes when you 'study' the bible you get locked into the micro level of text and forget that to read it broardly is necessary as well.

[Edited on 4-11-2002 by Netchicken]

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 12:41 PM
I don't have any wings to earn as I will not be an angel. We will sit in judgement of the angels, according to the KJV (well, I plan on playing hookey during that time. I'll be goofing off on the other side of the universe looking for those elusive yet pesky little greys.

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 02:17 PM
Sorry I am not the same blahblahblah on other message boards. I pretty much have some time just for this the ATS.

posted on Nov, 4 2002 @ 10:05 PM
CrossWard I never said I don't believe in god, where'd you get that idea?


posted on Jan, 2 2003 @ 11:00 PM
Freemason, your posts are excellent !!

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 10:45 AM
Wowzers I have a supporter
that sure beats the seething masses with torches

Hmm looking at what Crossward stated in response to my "spiting", I'm tollerant of beliefs, just not of actions. Christianity is by far better now than it was, but it's sure been the bane of humanity in the past, nipping at our heels like Cerberus. I am tollerant of a christian and his beliefs, and as I said I know many good people that are very VERY touched by Jesus, but I'm not very approving of all the Inquisitions and slaughters and witch hunts and Crusades and calling religions like Buddhism, "servants of the Devil". That is a bunch of whacky zealism.

no signature

posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 12:18 PM
Not trying to cross swords here, but how is that whacky zealism? Either you believe in yourt God and what your God says, or you are not of Him.
God says He is God, and He says that we are to have no other gods before Him. He says you are either with Him, or you are against Him. If you are against Him, that places you in the camp of the one who is the Father of Lies, and anything that leads a human from coming to know that Christ died for the sind of mankind is working against God. God makes it plain that the only way to Him is through His Son. These are the black and white teachings of God, and is not extremism, fanaticism or lunacy.
While the Christian should love and pray for the ones that are lost in other systems and religions, there is no place except in the politically correct assertion that one should be tolerant of other systems to the point to say that there are many ways to God and that these other systems and religions are here to appease the different mindsets of different people.
Again, God and the Bible were not responsible for the things that were done in His name hundreds of years ago, nor is He responsible when the likes of Jones or Koresch lead ignorant people astray. The leaders of the Church during Inquisition and Crusade days were jealous of the scriptures (knowledge and the twisting of knowledge = power and control), and the idiots following the pied piper to the tainted Kool-Aide are people who have the word available to them but prefer to let others tell them what to think and believe.

posted on Jan, 5 2003 @ 01:13 AM
Thomas the logic of your argument fails in relation to the fact that value systems change over time. A thousand years from now Christians throughout the world. Could conceivably view the interpretations of Christians today, no differently that we assess the behaviors of Christians hundreds of years ago. And we today would probably be justs as shocked, in relation to this. As those hundreds of years ago would probably respond to our considerations.

Keep in mind that despite the fact you presume Touqemada to not be an example of a proper Christian. The Pope to presided over his decisions granted him the right to believe that what he did was in direct adherence to Gods plan.

My impressions is that Christianity is not at all about presuming the status of others, but rather the status of oneself in relation to the one God. And as far as that is concerned I often consider, that a rose by any other names still smells as sweet.

What are your thoughts?

[Edited on 8-1-2003 by Toltec]

posted on Jan, 9 2003 @ 01:29 AM
The bible also says that you shouldn't cut the hair on your temples.
It says you shouldn't wear clothes of mixed fibres.
It says you shouldn't swear oaths.
It says you should pray in private, to yourself.
It says you shouldn't address any man as 'father' 'master' 'rabbi' or terms indicating they are greater than you.
It says if a ruler sins, he should sacrifice a goat. (bet goats hated Bill Clinton...)
It says we should shun menstruating women. (and not just cause they're psychotic)

I feel that possibly parts of the Bible are less relevant than they used to be. And that some relevant parts are cheerfully ignored by most churches.

None of this should be allowed to overshadow the basic message of God's love. Fix on what's important.

posted on Jan, 20 2003 @ 09:01 PM
Hey, it was also a sin to go to the bathroom, to masturbate, to have sex, to even think of sex.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in