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.

 

A serious flaw in the bible...

page: 5
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by moniker
 



It has also been translated many times. The bible you read is an interpretation of an interpretation/translation from another language, which no doubt in turn was an interpretation/translation from yet another language.
Precisely...doesn't that fact alone tell you that you shouldn't believe every word the bible says...and assuming it really was the word of God to begin with...who says man hasn't edited and changed it to his desire over time? ok...that's definitely my last post...be back later.

[edit on 20/10/09 by CHA0S]




posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ljib777
 


Abortion = Murder... Wow, if that's the way it is, let's all just have as many little kids as we can, how bout that, create as MANY LITTLE KIDS AS WE CAN, so that people's lives can get screwed over.

Is it right to force a girl who was RAPED to keep the child. Would you go and call her a murderer to try to not have to look upon the face of a haunting memory everyday. If you did I would probably want to kill you that badly just for putting that on them, it's disgusting to. If someone has sex and gets pregnant, KEEP YOUR RELIGION AND YOUR SELF-RIGHTOUS BELIEFS OFF HER BODY!!!

This is a very very touchy issue, one that pisses me off just to hear 1 person say that it's murder. Is it better to have someone emotionally scared and hating their child? Is it easy for them either way? What would you have them do? Have the kid and put it up for adoption? That helps there doesn't it. They still have to carry a burden. NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS!

And don't forget the child, if the person keeps an child they did not want, they may (unintentionally and subcontiously) loathe the child and treat it harsher, not giving the child a good life, and even if the child is given up for adoption, that in itself could be a hard pill to swallow.

I'm sorry, but when you look at abortion, look at it case by case. Or here's a better idea, don't bring it up. I don't care how they got pregnant, it's there own business. So keep your own views on abortion to yourself.

Sorry about if people find this rude. I just feel that an abortion is someone's choice and right. I don't care about a potential life of a child if it will damage both the parent's life and the potential child.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by moniker
 



If God had really wanted to communicate with us, he/she/whatever would not have had somebody write a book for him. He would have implanted the message directly into our souls.

To this all I have to say is the following, from Isaiah 55.8:

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.

In other words, God doesn't, nor does he have to, do things in the way that we as finite humans would understand.


Isn't that the same as saying that we should pay no attention to God?

Note that I prefer not to use the title "LORD" (especially not in all caps) as it is an anonymous title designed to anybody having power, authority or influence of any kind.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   
First of all Dune is a BOOK!


And as i said: Noah brought 7 of each (Genesis 7:2) and 2 (Genesis 6:19, Genesis 7:8, 9, 15)

And if Genesis 1 is the general account and Genesis 2 is additional detail, why is that in 1 he creates Animals before Humans, and in 2 he does it the other way round?



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Please show me where in the bible that states the age of the earth.

Unless I'm mistaken, this is calculated by people studying the bible and then figuring out how old the earth is.

Much like the calculations that Christians used to use to prove that the earth is the center of the universe and/or that the sun rotates around the earth, these calculations are made by men.

Men (and women) make mistakes and assumptions.

My opinion is that the bible does not state the age of the earth. Only people state the age of the earth and people are fallible.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anuberial
reply to post by Nventual
 


First of all, the Bible is the word of God...It is true that man wrote it, but God told them what to say and how to write it. They did not just interpret it

You absolutely sure about that ? God told man to write whats in the bibles ?

Last chance

You sure ?



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by moniker
 



Isn't that the same as saying that we should pay no attention to God?

No, it's not the same. The verse is saying, and I agree with it, that we shouldn't expect God to do things in the way that we as humans would expect him to.


Note that I prefer not to use the title "LORD" (especially not in all caps) as it is an anonymous title designed to anybody having power, authority or influence of any kind.

I put "Lord" in all caps simply because I don't know the unicode codes to put the o, r, and d in small caps, as my Bible has it. As for the term "LORD" in the Bible, it doesn't mean as you've said. Just look at the preface of any Bible and you will see why translators use "LORD" and what word it's translating. Here is the reasoning from the preface of the ESV:

...As is common among English translations today, the ESV usually renders the personal name of God (YHWH) with the word LORD (small capitals). ...


So, in this case "LORD" doesn't mean master. It is how we translate God's personal name into English, so that we can tell it apart from other names that are ascribed to God.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
CHAOS:

I think I can answer the question as to the timing of Genesis and the Beginning.


the word tohu means desolate, waste.
but elsewhere in the bible it says the earth was not created tohu.
therefore the opening passages of genesis are talking about the earth
being re-terraformed after a cataclysm. the cataclysm caused desolation
and waste, the water rose above land masses and froze solid *(note how the land is already there, the water just recedes to reveal it)
it's an ice age. so the beginning, is a long way off. and the earth without form and void, was a cataclysm that happened prior to the opening chapter.

also, the wormhole/blackhole at the center of galaxies is likely another god reference.



[edit on 20-10-2009 by undo]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by debunky
 



And if Genesis 1 is the general account and Genesis 2 is additional detail, why is that in 1 he creates Animals before Humans, and in 2 he does it the other way round?

They weren't created after humans in Genesis 2. Here is what you're referring to. Genesis 2.19:

Now out the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them.

If someone just reads over that verse it seems to contradict Genesis 1. But, in reality it doesn't. When you break down the tenses in the sentence, the first half [Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed...] is in the pluperfect tense. This indicates an action that was started in the past and was completed in the past. The first half of the verse is simply retelling something that God had already done, in this case creating animal life. The way we can tell that the first half of the sentence is in the pluperfect is because of the presence of the past tense of have [had] and the past participle [formed].



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by moniker
 



Isn't that the same as saying that we should pay no attention to God?

No, it's not the same. The verse is saying, and I agree with it, that we shouldn't expect God to do things in the way that we as humans would expect him to.


No that's not what it's saying, although it may be your interpretation of it. It's saying that we shouldn't expect to understand what God is doing and for what reasons, or even expect to notice that God is doing anything whatsoever.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   
remember we're talking about the literary style of the sumerians and akkadians. they would tell the story a piece at a time, then tell it again with more info added. then a new piece of the story, then tell it again with more info added. that's basically what you see in the opening chapter of genesis. it's also not terribly linear, time-wise

[edit on 20-10-2009 by undo]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by CHA0S
So...what say you Christians?


Doesn't matter how hold the earth is.
What matters is that we are sinners
who need to repent of our sins and to
accept Jesus Christ as our Savior.

Thanks,
TT



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Hi Windbob--

So are you actually saying that you BELIEVE that the flat earth is surrounded by a Req'iak (lit. 'Dome' which is BY DEFINITION flat at the bottom, round at the top) and that VEGETATION and TREES on the EARTH were CREATED (Heb. ba'ra) BEFORE the SUN, the MOON and the STARS?

Are you actually defending the pre-Scientific Weltanschaunng in the Genesis Creation Myths as 'SCIENCE' or 'FACT' or what exactly ARE you saying? Your answer was a little vauge it seems to me on exactly HOW to take the mythical language of these pre-scientific post Exilic unpointed paleoHebew liturgical texts...



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nventual
On one hand, what is written in the bible isn't necessarily the word of God, it is the word of man and how he interprets what God has shown and said. On the other hand, how science interprets everything is dependent on its past formulas and knowledge - therefore it is flawed and can and has been incorrect.


2 TIMOTHY 3:16 NKJ
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

2 PETER 1:20-21 NIV
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.
For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

HEBREWS 1:1 NKJ
God, who at various times and in different ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets.

1 THESSALONIANS 2:13 NKJ
. . . when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.

Thanks,
TT



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by moniker
 



No that's not what it's saying, although it may be your interpretation of it. It's saying that we shouldn't expect to understand what God is doing and for what reasons, or even expect to notice that God is doing anything whatsoever.

How in the world do you get that? Here is the verse again, Isaiah 55.8:

For my thoughts are not your thoughts; neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.

This verse is so straight forward, it requires virtually no interpretation.

1. God doesn't think like we humans do. (For my thoughts are not your thoughts)
2. The way that God does things isn't the way that we has humans would do things. (Neither are your ways my ways)

Please, explain.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Actually i wasn't referring to 2:19 but 2:18

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

So, if 2:19 is referring to things he did before, it is contradicted by Genesis 1 *and* 2:18.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by CHA0S
 





The bible says the Earth is around 6000 to 10,000 years old.

Where does the Bible say such a thing?
The Bible coroborates itself thru many different authors over hundreds of years. Considering that you can't get the same story of what happened at
the scene of an accident, fron two diffrent witnesses. Not to marvel at just that alone as a miracle shows someones head is in the sand.The storys
are their as a history of how God deals with mankind. So we don't repeat the mistakes of the past. It is also called The Living Bible for a reason.
I swear on my skin and on my kids eyes the book itself is a living thing.

[edit on 20-10-2009 by randyvs]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by debunky
 



So, if 2:19 is referring to things he did before, it is contradicted by Genesis 1 *and* 2:18.

No, there is still no contradiction. It's established in Genesis 1 that animals came before man. Check.

So, now we come to Genesis 2.18-19:

The the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone' I will make him a helper fit for him." Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed ever beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.

Then as the verses go on, Adam sees that none of the animals are suitable for him and eventually Eve is created from Adam's rib.

I truly don't see any contradiction. Here's why. God says that he wants to create a helper for Adam in verse 18. Verses 19 and 20 are then seemingly written as an aside, reminding the reader of something that had already occurred, or to fill them in with some details. You can even take verses 19 and 20 out, going from 18 to 21, and the story still makes sense:


The the LORD God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him. So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man...


Here is a visual "graph" of how I see it constructed.

God wanting a helper for Adam v18---> [Details about why God wanted a helper for Adam v19-20] --->How God made the helper vv21ff.

By the way, we do this today sometimes when we tell stories. Giving the main thrust and then filling in some details before carrying on.



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Hi OctoTom

Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that the 2 (read 'em: TWO) Creation Myths in Genesis (1:1 to 2:4a and 2:4b to 4:26) are NOT contradictory?

Try colouring each of them in TWO different coloured highlighters then read them side by side very very very very very carefully, even in English if you cannot manage the unpointed paleo-Hebrew of either the later Masoretic or of the earlier SamPent.

You should see at once that the ORDER of Creation is completely different in the 1st one as compared with the 2nd one:

In the 1st myth, 'male and female are created together' ex nihilo on the 6th day of creation ('let us make man in our images' etc) using the verb in (Heb. 'bara') 'to create' -- but in the 2nd Creation Myth which begins in Gen 2:4b the verb is not 'bara' but 'formed' (Heb 'yatzar') where the the man is 'formed' first from mud (Heb Edom) then the animals were 'formed' to find a sexmate for the man then the woman is ('formed' )from the ('side' ) of the man).

You can see the order of creation in the 1st Creation Myth (1:1 to 2:4a) is heavens, earth, pre-existent 'waters' , then light, darkness, a day, night, the dome, the separateion of waters above/below the dome, dry land, seas, grass-fruit-seeds-trees-vegetation, then the lights in the dome: sun moon stars, then fish, birds,then cattle, creepeing things, beasts of field 'then male and female created he them together' (the same writer recurrs in 5:1-2 In the day when Elohim created mankind, males and female created he them in his own image and HE CALLED THEIR NAME ADAM in the day that THEY were created and be blessed them..) where there is NO mention of Hayyah (i.e. Eve).

In the 2nd Creation Myth, the order is Earth, Heaven, mist from the earth, mud, Adam 'formed' from mud, YHWH-Elohim breathes his 'breath' into his nostrils, man quickens (no Eve yet, no male and female created he them in his own image etc.) then placed in a Garden to 'tend' and eat etc. then animals are created as a mate for Adam, then the naming of the animals then the 'forming' of Hayyah from Adam's side, separately, not together...

TWO different myths from TWO different writers writing for TWO different audiences with TWO different names for 'the god' = ELOHIM for the 1st myth and YHWH-EOLHIM for the 2nd myth. THEY DO NOT MATCH.

As I said, read them several times very very very closely. Then come back and we can discuss this thing further...



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Sigismundus
 


Ugh, read my earlier posts. Genesis 1 is a general account of creation. Genesis 2 is a more specific account of the creation of man. No, the don't contradict.


In the 2nd Creation Myth, the order is Earth, Heaven, mist from the earth, mud, Adam 'formed' from mud, ...

Perhaps you should reread Genesis 2. The only thing created is man. All the other things that you say are created are said to already exist.

[edit on 10/20/2009 by octotom]



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join