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, Man's book or God's Word?

page: 31
25
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Well if this is like a census you know where I stand Titan. Gods word.
The Bible is all truth and that's a fact. If it weren't it wouldn't be the living Bible. Funny how for you to even ask this question, it proposes or suggests a belief in God. There are many scientific facts in the Bible that were there way before science came along to back them up.
You really can't get around Gods word my friend.

And no I don't want to smell your finger you sicko.


[edit on 5-7-2010 by randyvs]




posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 





Leo, I know you have a good heart and it reflects in your words, but how would you offer hope to someone who has nothing?


For those with nothing, they are not in a position to be able to look within...for they are looking outside of themselves, in survival mode.

If the world came together, and rationed our riches of earth...this would be real hope...not something they cant see. So the hope that is to come to these people with nothing must come through us, as a people, as their other selves. Until then, they suffer and the pain is on our hands, we, as a whole, reap this seed.

I can tell them God loves them unconditionally, and that one day they will have rest...but what good does that do them really. This might give them hope, and surely I would try this, to explain to them that they are loved without limits. But their suffering is a part of us as a whole unit. Their pain is here for a reason, and that reason is our lesson. Duality serves its purpose in the Divine plan. Just as though the greedy man who hogs his goods from sharing with others wont understand how this plays a part in the whole, these that suffer wont understand how they play a part in the whole.

For someone that has nothing, their coping and adjusting is truly tested.

I hate to say it, but who is to say, that a soul that never helps another while in need, will come reap a life of being in need.

Smiles, eye contact, showing concern face to face, offering of food, ect....is the hope that these people look for, so that is what I would try to give them.

Hopefully by them seeing others care....they get a glimpse of the Spirit being here.

I would remind others, this flesh body is not what makes us who we are. What makes you who you are, is within you. I would remind them, this life here is a blink of an eye.

There is no great perfect answer to give those that have nothing. The best thing we can give them, is love.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
The Bible is all truth and that's a fact.


No.
It's merely your BELIEF.

Calling your beliefs facts is no more true than calling Muslim beliefs "facts".


Kap



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 





It's merely your BELIEF


No the Bible is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry kapyawn, but it is.

[edit on 5-7-2010 by randyvs]



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
No the Bible is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry kapyawn, but it is.
[edit on 5-7-2010 by randyvs]


No the Koran is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry randick, but it is.

No the Gita is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry randick, but it is.

No Scientology is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry randick, but it is.

Convinced?
No?

How strange!
That YOUR argument ONLY applies to YOUR book!


Kap



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I would ask you to look at this vid
Banned From The Bible Or maybe you could try the one I posted above. (but i have my doubts as to whether you could handle it) The Bible is a selection of writings taken from many many others. The first Bible was commissioned by Constantine Emperor of Rome as the foundation of their new state religion. Blind faith is not fact. The actual history is far more interesting than church dogma.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Reading through this thread I've heard more interesting ideas than in my entire life. I'm 42. I've been questioning religion from day one. I grew up Catholic and when I was older dropped religion altogether because nothing about it felt right to me anymore.

I believe we are all God. I don't think this life is a test, but more of an experience. I don't believe there is any true right or wrong, as it's all perspective. I believe God created the universe and the rules that govern it and doesn't necessarily need to be part of every little thing any more than we need to be a part of every second of a pet goldfish.

I find the biggest problem is that people want absolutes. They either believe everything in the Bible or nothing. All powerful all knowing God or none at all, I don't think it's necessary to have all the answers to be here. We're on the "physical plane", maybe it's just as ok to "be human" and enjoy and experience everything human as it is to seek spiritual enlightenment. Different strokes could be a universal truth?

Great thread. Wish I found this site years ago. ;-)



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Kapyong
 





It's merely your BELIEF


No the Bible is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry kapyawn, but it is.

[edit on 5-7-2010 by randyvs]


Where do I get my own talking donky, snake, and bush then?

That would be awesome at parties!



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by randyvs
 


I would ask you to look at this vid
Banned From The Bible Or maybe you could try the one I posted above. (but i have my doubts as to whether you could handle it) The Bible is a selection of writings taken from many many others. The first Bible was commissioned by Constantine Emperor of Rome as the foundation of their new state religion. Blind faith is not fact. The actual history is far more interesting than church dogma.


Hi Cristina,
I don’t’ have extensive knowledge of the Gnostic Gospel but good enough to convince me that it is definitely not an inspired Word of God like the Bible Gospels.

But to confirm what I know, can I please ask you a simple question? If you can answer I’ll be glad to hear it. Please make it simple if you can.

1) Are the Gnostic Gospels close to the Bible Gospels (teachings) or are they more closely related to ancient Greek philosophy, Buddhism, and Hinduism?

2) Let’s take The Gnostic Gospel of Philip, how does it characterize the relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus? Is it with respect or more than that?

You also mentioned the Apocrypha’s and Constantine in your 2nd post, my questions are:

1) Since the Apocrypha were never part of the Hebrew scriptures (OT) did the First century Christians accepted them as part of the Greek scriptures (NT)? If so can I see the proof?

2) When Constantine convene the Council of Nicaea were the people in that council part of the original first century Christians, a newly formed religious group or a corruption of the former?

3) The meeting in Nicaea, was it strategic or religious?

Thanks,
edmc2



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 




The Bible is all truth and that's a fact.


I've already pointed out plenty of contradictions and flaws in this thread. The Bible has already lost, your opinion on the matter is moot. And it isn't just my opinion that these contradictions are there either, plenty of others have realized how flawed the Bible is, but the believers are blind to it.



Funny how for you to even ask this question, it proposes or suggests a belief in God.


At the time I posted this thread's OP I would have classified myself as an agnostic-theist. Now I am an agnostic atheist (look it up). The thread, also, was about the assertion BY BELIEVERS that the Bible was the word of God.



There are many scientific facts in the Bible that were there way before science came along to back them up.


Genesis still claims there is a firmament. It doesn't matter if the book gets a few ideas right, it still fails on most science and history. An almost complete failure with a few hits doesn't make a book divine. You are really grasping at straws here but go ahead and name five scientific facts that the Bible says and show me that they weren't already known at the time the books were written or translated.



You really can't get around Gods word my friend.


It really isn't God's word Randy. I don't need to go around it, its a decimated corpse on the roadside... its already dead, please don't make me run over it anymore than I have to to convince you of that fact.



No the Bible is all truth period.


I've never heard a less intelligent statement in all my life. Please keep on elaborating, show everyone how your belief based on pure blind faith is the one and only truth. Show me evidence of the Creation story in genesis, Noah's flood, show me archeological evidence suggesting people lived into their 900s.

I've supported my side of the argument with logical contradictions, others have pointed out historical inadequacies, moral absurdities, etc. All you've done is this:




posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Kapyong
 





It's merely your BELIEF


No the Bible is all truth period. Wheather it's my belief or not. Sorry kapyawn, but it is.

[edit on 5-7-2010 by randyvs]


Where do I get my own talking donky, snake, and bush then?

That would be awesome at parties!


mR. Gunderson,

May I suggest you get a donkey, a snake and fire retardant bush then hire a ventriloquest and you will have an awsome party.

just make sure that the bush is grade FR4/5 to be on the safe side.

ty,
edmc2



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 03:41 AM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 


“The term apocrypha is used with various meanings, including "hidden", "esoteric", "spurious", "of questionable authenticity”

“The biblical apocrypha (from the Greek word ἀπόκρυφος meaning hidden) are books published in a separate section of some editions of the Bible despite not necessarily being considered part of the canon For this reason they are typically printed in a third section of the Bible apart from the Old and New Testaments. In many editions they are omitted entirely.
Different churches and congregations have differing views on what, if anything, constitutes their Biblical Apocrypha.”

It is extremely difficult to argue against the 'cult' form of christianity. It is a well worn technique from any cult (not just the christian variety) to teach its adherants that should 'doubt' enter into their thoughts that 'it's the devil tryng to get ya'. Outside of christian cults they teach the adherants at these times to use mantras, repetition repetition repetition until the doubts have evaporated, within christianity they teach that one should pray even harder....it all amounts to the same thing. Brainwashing. Do not think....have faith.

Another technique which operates on this principle is hypnosis....you must have 'faith' in the hypnotist before you will become 'entranced'. Enough trust to submit your own ego to another's control.

As is stated in the first vid I posted (Secret Gate to the Garden of Eden)...the narrative to the Bible is like its outer layer of clothing which covers a deeper and more spititual meaning unknown by the uninitiated. The Bible, especially the OT, is a code....a code not so evident in its English translation....but still decipherable to an extent.

The second vid I posted is not necessarily about gnosticism...it is about the compilation of the Bible as we know it. In that vid you can see how certain books nearly made it into the NT but didn't. The King James 'official' version of the Bible is just that....the official version. Sanctioned by King James VI of Scotland who became King James I of England (Son of Mary Queen of Scots). BTW King James was not particulary God fearing...he was a canny polititian.

The Celtic Church is one of the oldest christian churches...indeed Scots/Irish travelled to Nicea to participate in the debate over Jesus's divinity at the behest of Emperor Constantine. The Celtic Church is also one of the most liberal churches...that is because they are comfortable in their skin...even tho' they combined the biblical teaching with local indiginous beliefs. The celtic cross is still on every church in my neighbourhood.

What I love about the gnostic gospels....and I mean love....is that they are NOT written to be taken literally. They have been written to open the human mind to 'big' thinking putting into language concepts beyond ordinary human understanding. They are a meditative tool.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by edmc^2
 


“The term apocrypha is used with various meanings, including "hidden", "esoteric", "spurious", "of questionable authenticity”

“The biblical apocrypha (from the Greek word ἀπόκρυφος meaning hidden) are books published in a separate section of some editions of the Bible despite not necessarily being considered part of the canon For this reason they are typically printed in a third section of the Bible apart from the Old and New Testaments. In many editions they are omitted entirely.
Different churches and congregations have differing views on what, if anything, constitutes their Biblical Apocrypha.”

It is extremely difficult to argue against the 'cult' form of christianity. It is a well worn technique from any cult (not just the christian variety) to teach its adherants that should 'doubt' enter into their thoughts that 'it's the devil tryng to get ya'. Outside of christian cults they teach the adherants at these times to use mantras, repetition repetition repetition until the doubts have evaporated, within christianity they teach that one should pray even harder....it all amounts to the same thing. Brainwashing. Do not think....have faith.

Another technique which operates on this principle is hypnosis....you must have 'faith' in the hypnotist before you will become 'entranced'. Enough trust to submit your own ego to another's control.

As is stated in the first vid I posted (Secret Gate to the Garden of Eden)...the narrative to the Bible is like its outer layer of clothing which covers a deeper and more spititual meaning unknown by the uninitiated. The Bible, especially the OT, is a code....a code not so evident in its English translation....but still decipherable to an extent.

The second vid I posted is not necessarily about gnosticism...it is about the compilation of the Bible as we know it. In that vid you can see how certain books nearly made it into the NT but didn't. The King James 'official' version of the Bible is just that....the official version. Sanctioned by King James VI of Scotland who became King James I of England (Son of Mary Queen of Scots). BTW King James was not particulary God fearing...he was a canny polititian.

The Celtic Church is one of the oldest christian churches...indeed Scots/Irish travelled to Nicea to participate in the debate over Jesus's divinity at the behest of Emperor Constantine. The Celtic Church is also one of the most liberal churches...that is because they are comfortable in their skin...even tho' they combined the biblical teaching with local indiginous beliefs. The celtic cross is still on every church in my neighbourhood.

What I love about the gnostic gospels....and I mean love....is that they are NOT written to be taken literally. They have been written to open the human mind to 'big' thinking putting into language concepts beyond ordinary human understanding. They are a meditative tool.


You realize Pagans introduced Gnosticism in Alexandria, Egypt right? The Word of God is true, and God includes prophecy into His true words so that we can verify it was breathed from an omniscient deity and not of man. A deity who "declares the end from the beginning."



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Ever checked out the Kabbalah? Are you saying that the originators of the language and the Abrahamic religions don't know what they're saying. The Bible was very methodically put together to facilitate christianity becoming the state religion of Rome. It is one means to an end not THE means. If it brings people comfort well and good.

On the subject of pagan...lets talk christmas...the celebration of the solstace NOT Christ's birthday. One example of the Church overlaying local beliefs. Lets go into Easter .....ever wonder why we celebrate it with eggs.....its the celebration of the Spring Goddess Eostre (the root for the name of the female hormone eostrogen)....goddess rebirth and renewal The date of Easter changes every year. It is....the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox. Or how about candlemass....that takes place on Bridgette's Day....otherwise known as Bride....as in the Bride and Groom of the Christian wedding. I really could go on and on.

The decorated christmas tree? Well the Druids believed that the tree was the giver of all things to facilitate life....thats why we put our presents underneath it. The baubles on the tree represent magical witches balls etc etc etc. Or how about that faerie, sorry 'angel' at the top.

Shame Christians miss out on so much of human history. It really is.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by christina-66]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by christina-66
 


I'll forgive you for being ignorant to whom you're addressing. I don't decorate a Christmas tree, nor do I celebrate Easter, nor do I participate in candle masses. We are to avoid ALL pagan worships and celebrations.

HERE is the history of your pagan Gnostic scriptures:

"Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit: but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." —Matt. 7:17-18

Note the roots of corruption.

I. Justin Martyr (100 A.D.)

A. He was born a pagan, and died in the robes of a pagan priest.

B. He was the first to mix Gnosticism with Christianity. Gnosticism was a heretical doctrine which taught that Christ was created by God the Father. Funk and Wagnall's Standard Dictionary defines Gnosticism as "A philosophical and religious system (first to sixth century) teaching that knowledge rather than faith was the key to salvation." Many scholars today place their knowledge above faith in God's word.

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" —Rom. 10:17

C. Historian Dr. Benjamin G. Wilkinson wrote, "In the teachings of Justin Martyr, we begin to see how muddy the stream of pure Christian doctrine was running among the heretical seats fifty years after the death of the apostle John."

("Which Bible?". ed. Dr. David 0. Fuller, Grand Rapids International Pub., Grand Rapids, Mica., 49501, p. 191)

II. Tatian (150 A.D.)

A. He was a disciple of Justin Martyr.

B. Like Martyr, he also embraced Gnosticism.

C. Tatian wrote a harmony of the gospels using the Christian Scriptures and the Gnostic gospels, thus omitting Scripture (such as John 8:1-11; and Mark 16.9-20).

D. His. "Harmony of the Gospels" was so corrupt that the Bishop of Syria threw out 200 copies.

III. Clement of Alexandria (200 A.D.)

A. Clement was a disciple of Tatian (Remember Luke 6:40-"The disciple is not above his master: but everyone that is perfect shall be as his master.")

B. Clement taught that there was no real heaven or hell, no blood atonement of Christ, and no infallible Bible.

C. He used the Gnostic Scriptures to teach his students.

D. He founded the school of Theology in Alexandria Egypt.

IV. Origen (184-254 A.D.)

A. Origen was a disciple of Clement of Alexandria.

B. He held to the same doctrine as Clement, plus he taught baptism was necessary for babies to gain salvation.

C. Origen stated, "The Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written." (Ibid. p. 192).

D. Dr. Wilkinson stated, "When we come to Origen, we speak the name of him who did the most of all to create and give direction to the forces of apostasy down through the centuries." (Ibid.).

E. Origen was one of the first textual critics. His textual work in both the N.T. and the O.T. (the "Hexapla") was the basis for two of the most corrupt manuscripts used by the Roman Catholic Church. (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus).

F. Origen developed a method of Biblical interpretation which is called "allegorization". Origen believed the Bible was only a set of stories that illustrate truth, but not literal facts. He believed Christ to be created and subordinate to the Father (the same as Jehovah's Witnesses), the pre-existence of the soul before birth (the same as the Mormons), and the final restoration of all spirits (Universal Salvation). (see Dr. Earle Cairns "Christianity Through The Centuries", Zondervan Publishing House, p. 122).

V. Eusebius (260-340 A.D.)

A. He was trained at Origen's school in Alexandria.

B. Eusebius was the editor of two Greek manuscripts (mss.) named Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. These two mss. were discredited and abandoned by early Christians as being corrupt. ("Which Bible?" p. 139,143).

These are Roman Catholic mss. and were not used by Protestant Christians until 1881. These two mss. are the basis for Roman Catholic Bibles and every major English translation of the Bible since 1901. These mss. were not the ones used for the King James Bible.

C. Eusebius was Roman Catholic in his doctrine (see his book, "Ecclesiastical History", Vols. 1-5).

D. He was commissioned by Emperor Constantine to make 50 copies of Scripture for the Roman church. Eusebius copied the Gnostic Scriptures and Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

VI. Jerome (340-420 A.D.)

A. Like Eusebius, Jerome was Roman Catholic in doctrine.

B. Jerome translated the Greek mss. of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus into Latin (called Jerome's Latin Vulgate). This was the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church.

C. The ms. Vaticanus was placed in the Vatican library, while the ms. Sinaiticus was abandoned in a Catholic monastery, and they were not used for the next 1,500 years.

VII. Tischendorf (1869)

A. He was the first Protestant to find and use the mss. of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

B. Tischendorf was a liberal theologian.

VIII. Westcott and Hort (1881)

A. They used Vaticanus and Sinaiticus to produce a new Greek N.T.. This Greek N.T. is not the same as the one used for the KJB nor during the Reformation.

B. Their Greek N.T. was the basis for the Revised Version (RV) of 1881 and the basic Greek text for all modern translations such as the RSV, TEV, NASV, N.TV, etc.

C. The Greek text of Westcott and Hort (W & H) differs from the Greek text of the King James Bible (the Received Text) 5,788 times, or 10% of the text. (For examples, see the section "A Brief Comparison of Bible translations".)

D. Since all modern translations are based on the work of W & H, it would do us well to know the theology of these two men.

WESTCOTT: "I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry (Mary-worship) bears witness."

"No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did."

HORT: "Mary-worship and Jesus-worship have very much in common."

"Protestantism is only parenthetical and temporary."

"The pure Romish view (Catholic) seems to be nearer, and more likely to lead to the truth than the Evangelical."

"Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue."

These men did not hold to sound doctrine; instead they have turned, "...away their ears from the truth, and she be turned unto fables." —2 Tim. 4:4



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


lol....just what exactly are you saying here. Oh and I never asked for, nor do I require your forgiveness.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
It may help if you let me know what branch of christianity you do 'believe' in....lol



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


lol....just what exactly are you saying here. Oh and I never asked for, nor do I require your forgiveness.
My point is this, the gnostic scriptures, and Gnosticism were created after the death of Christ by pagans. It's heresies and deceit sown by the devil.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by christina-66
It may help if you let me know what branch of christianity you do 'believe' in....lol
I believe in Christ alone, not the traditions of men. God's Word is my final authority, and my salvation is a free gift from God through the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ and His shed blood. He is the narrow way to God. I'm non-denominational. I'm a member of the body of Christ, nothing more.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join