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.

 

Is the BIBLE Truth Absolute?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   
What percentage of "Truth" do you percieve the bible to be???

It's common knowledge and understanding that mankind adds mythology and elobrates on everything. So what makes you think the bible isn't spun in mythology?

What percentage is fact and what percentage is real???

I've read some convincing perspectives that say Jewish Writers took the teachings of Melchizidek and distorted them for nationalisim adjendia.

Should christianity really be more PAULitheisim?

What percent of the bible is true?

Why do so many People think the bible is the "WORD OF GOD" when it was the conscious thoughts "WORD" that the Profit heard and were told to write down?

What do you think?

The Bible isn't the word of God. The bible is a little more then 50% accurate. Isn't the Bible just lukewarm?




posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
By calling "Christianity" more like PAUL-itheisim it's stating that the story of "the christ" was spun into more mythological aspects rather then the real story by the follower of Christ "Paul".

I'm not looking for a heated debate here. Just some oppions, a cross-cut understanding of peoples perspectives...

Is this topic too "Politically Incorrect"?



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Since no one has interpreted the meanings in the bible fully it is impossible to say. You must remember, almost 2000 years ago they used words and slang much differently then we can perceive today. Some words must have been misinterpreted along the way because the language that was used was so much more different then the way the translators used.

So to answer your question...you're guess is as good as mine.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


I'm not sure people are getting what it is I'm asking. As you've brought up a VERY RELIVANT and accute point as to why the bible is NOT absolute truth....

There are many many mistranslations and several lack of translations.

Such terms as "Jerusalem" could be translated to something along the lines of "Those with the inner Peace". so that when it is talking about the nation of Jerusalem, it isn't talking about the national collection of the Jewish people, rather the collection and union of the people that have inner peace...



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:04 PM
link   
My take on it is this, “Keep your eye on the ball”, The Gospel. John is the base that I believe is the most accurate. I know that academia dated it late in the times, though there is no proof that it wasn’t handed down faithfully. One aspect of it that convinces me that it is truth is the unlimited capabilities of God shown and the unlimited love of God sending his Beloved Son to us. The other Gospels were more concerned with covering the biography, details and the rules whereas John’s covers the “meaning and mission of Christ”. One day we will all be alone in the dark, no breathing, no heartbeat, no hearing, and of all the Gospels this is the one that I would like to be remembering at that moment as I praise God, and then His Holy Spirit guiding me Home.

Peace,

STM

[edit on 1/10/2008 by seentoomuch]



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
I don't want to go into depth with one of my big long explanations, but Yes, the Bible is 100% true.

It is truly God-inspired through the Holy Spirit, is infallible, and the manuscripts from various generations for thousands of years have changed nearly not at all (like the differences between an accidental period left off in copying or something)...think about the Essene Community...

There aren't contridictions, though others disagree...

I have faith, and the meanings of the Bible can be fully understood through in-depth study of various translations (or just learn Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic), as well as with the aide of a lexicon, even though many things are somewhat cryptic. One also has to note the culture of the time and the sayings and analogies that are inserted that were common at the time of writing.

Just see my posts in the thread about Abominations in the Bible...it only explains Christianity, but debunks many fallacies of thought the majority of the non-Christian world has.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by seentoomuch
 


Thanks for adding your perspective. I'm in hope we can get a really great debate going on here.

Although I feel as far as understanding the message of the kingdom here on earth is for the most part good enough in the bible, I do have understanding about the plan to generalize and supersize the scriptures.

So, "eye on the ball" as long as it isn't Lucy holding it Charley Brown!



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by joesomebody
 


Well thanks for that comment joe, but as far as accurate goes, the bible is far from 100% "truthful".

Though to be fair, there are other then historically accurate truths contained thoughout the bible in some aspects of 100% truth. Just not historically, but through perspective and understanding, sure.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:19 PM
link   
The Bible is 100% the truth...divinely inspired it is the word of God.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by kinglizard
 


The "Word of God" is the conscious voice that the profits heard that instructed the profit to write.

It is a misinturpetation of context.


It would be like me saying that GOD SAYS "this and that" and that this thread and my statements are "The word of God".

If I am a real hearer of the word of God, that doesn't make this Thread the word of God.

The word of God is a consciouness, not a text that can be edited and manipulated.



posted on Jan, 10 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   
The Greek and Hebrew manuscripts of the Essene Community haven't been edited and manipulated.

I know what you mean, the Bible is God Inspired, but at the same time it gives the truth, and when the full meanings, not the full text of the Bible are understood, the fact of it being God's word 100% comes out. (If you don't know Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, it takes lots of study, multiple Bible versions, and a good lexicon...it doesn't hurt to be friends with a Messianic Rabbi who knows all of the old oral stories and traditions, too
)

Yes, there are comments and underscores by the prophets and writers, but the message God intended them to write for Him is still there.

There are direct quotes from God in the Bible, though, when things such as "Thus says the Lord.." precedes them.

Let's not get into the whole "How did we get the Bible we have today argument..." I can explain it if we do, but that'll be a longer post, and I'm tired right now...

But the truth remains, and in reality, the entire Bible's main purpose and it's climax is that of the truth of Jesus Christ.

[edit on 10-1-2008 by joesomebody]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by joesomebody
 


No, but the Old Testiment was geered toward nationailism for the jewish peoples.

The New Testiment was written some 60-90 years after the events, and only after all partiest involved came together to try to tell "one story"

Both Scriptures have been Manipulated by MANKIND!



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 12:03 AM
link   
And not to mention that Christ himself stated over and over again that the deciples just "didn't get it".

Comeon! The Bible is next to Junk in understandings. Right?

Do you think that's the book the christ would have written? No, I tell you no.

The understandings attributed to the bible are people's personal perceptions of a water down and bloated story.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 12:36 AM
link   
I like Mark and John the best. I don't like Matthew though, really at all. It's the most harshest book in there which is probably why the church made that the first gospel in the bible. It paints God as evil, mean and trys to make you fear God, yet in Mark Jesus says only God is good. Why would something good want you to precive it how Mattew paints it? Mark is the oldest gospel, which makes me feel its closer to Jesus' real teachings. I don't care for the rest of the bible. In Matthew Jesus says you have to take up the cross, which is stupid because Jesus didn't know that the cross would become a symbol of him after he died. Even if he did why would he tell someone that who doesn't know what it means?


[edit on 11-1-2008 by Shawn B.]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Incarnated
What percentage of "Truth" do you percieve the bible to be???


About 98% (2% due to human scribal error and such). But I believe the message of salvation remains 100% in tact. God isn't going to keep something He knows we need from us because its in our nature to mess it up through scribal errors or a misunderstanding of prophecy- just like a parent is not going to withhold clothing from their children knowing it will later get torn and stained.


It's common knowledge and understanding that mankind adds mythology and elobrates on everything. So what makes you think the bible isn't spun in mythology?


Well, one aspect is the Jewish and Babylonian Talmud. The Jews were very careful to preserve the sanctity of their Scriptures. Commentaries and additions or deletions were never allowed. So, in order to add their thoughts while maintaining their Bible, they wrote their thoughts down separately into the Talmuds. As for the New Testament, there were simply too many eye witnesses alive at the writing of the texts to make it up. Those that tried, were immediately exposed as impostors.


What percentage is fact and what percentage is real???

I've read some convincing perspectives that say Jewish Writers took the teachings of Melchizidek and distorted them for nationalisim adjendia.


So, we should alter or dismiss the Bible due to the opinion of man which has proven to be faulty time and time again? No thank you.


Should christianity really be more PAULitheisim?


If you have a problem with the Pauline epistles, then check out the... Oh, I don't know... other NT books that weren't written by him. If you are worried about it, then read the Gospel of John for now. He was an original apostle, eye witness, and was around before Paul and outlived him. Matthew as well. And the Epistles of Peter. And Mark's Gospel. And... You get the point.


Why do so many People think the bible is the "WORD OF GOD" when it was the conscious thoughts "WORD" that the Profit heard and were told to write down?


Because only God could know the exact future and only God could be behind the hundreds of undesigned coincidences in the Bible. I'm too skeptical to believe all of these dozens of men over the centuries knew about the representation of numbers, feasts, temple rituals, sacrifices, and expositional theology all throughout the Bible and their foreshadowing while being in cahoots. It defies logic. And please don't say the councils "rewrote" the Bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the writings of the early church fathers disprove this.


The Bible isn't the word of God. The bible is a little more then 50% accurate. Isn't the Bible just lukewarm?


Not at all in my opinion. Archeology and prophecy are the two big ones. Civilizations, historical locations, and people only mentioned in the Bible were believed to have not even existed until secular archeology later confirmed their existence. And not the most world renowned psychic or seer could even come close to the Bible's prophetic accuracy.

Jesus Christ was a real historical person. This is documented inside and outside the Bible by believers and pagans. Eleven of the twelve apostles (after Barnabas replaced Judas) were killed for their faith. NOBODY WOULD DIE FOR SOMETHING THEY KNEW WAS A LIE even if they would die for something that was false believing it was true. An apostle had to be an original eye witnesses to Jesus' ministry and resurrection. They all died with the exception of John.

[edit on 1/11/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Nevermind...

@Incarnated: Not EVERYTHING has to be a conspiracy. They didn't all necessarily get together to document Jesus' life. They were all there anyway, so it stands to reason that the accounts would be extremely similar, even if numerical amounts are slightly off, or that some things were omitted that were nonessential parts of Jesus' life that don't drive home the facts of salvation, or had pertinence to His teachings.


[edit on 11-1-2008 by joesomebody]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 01:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Incarnated
 


Hi Incarnated!

Original post.........» Is the BIBLE Truth Absolute?
yes, the Bible is the absolute TRUTH!
If the people choose to re write and alter the LOGOS(WORD) of God, it is their choice to do so and suffer the consequences.....as it is our choice to believe mans word over Gods Word!
As far as your word is concerned, you have done nothing but falsify information.....you are so confused as to what you believe as truth, that you are not so sure what you believe in.

You started this post to deliberately alter the WORD of God......
Why?
In my honest opinion, you are seeking mans glory over Gods!
You might actually believe what you say/write to be the truth...but all you have done so far,is to confuse yourself into believing your own lies.


In another post you state that you are the Archangel Michael.......
In another you claim to also be the Resurrected Christ....what nonesense!


Are you seeking the Glory of people?
post by Incarnated

And......


So in theatrical classic "me" form, yes I am both the archangel Michael and the long awated retrun of "the son of man" however if we want to examin this issue in dept at least let me start my own thread about it so I will get the points.

Take care,

helen



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 03:48 AM
link   
What makes you so sure???


What makes you think that?


What makes you believe you have already accepted "the truth"?


Jesus Said: "If you think you're awake then you are not".


Don't take me wrong. I am not trying to prove nothing. I am not trying to disprove you. I'm just trying to get a good discussion going, and maybe score some points while at it.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:07 AM
link   
The Bible is not a destination. It is more like a map, indicating directions and guidelines, and even some of those can be called into question.

It is a construct of man, and thenfore subject to interpretation. It contains transcription errors, translation errors, can be used to justify Genocide, torture and criminal inhumanity. And it has been used to justify these acts in the last 1500 years, so please dont attempt to argue this fact.

The Bible is a gateway to A higher plane of spiritual contemplation, it is not something that should be held as a sacred relic, this is idolatry. Christ never wrote anything down purposely, it would become an object of adoration and we should learn from this example. The bible is not to be worshipped, period. It is a road map.

LOGOS is not a written word...that is another misconception. Logos is actually words that have become physical acts, words that have come to life, so to speak.

For every point made to justify anyones position within the Bible, there can be made the opposite point to argue it, also using the Bible. This is the beauty of this book, it forces contemplation within ourselves, which is what Jesus intended all along; the kingdom of God exists within you.

When we know ourselves, we come to know God, we come to understand what the message of Christ truly is.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hallberg Rassy


The Bible is not a destination. It is more like a map, indicating directions and guidelines, and even some of those can be called into question.


Oh blessed be you, if more of your number were not such fools the world would be a much finer place already!



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join