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.

 

My first issues with the Bible.

page: 30
47
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaosComplex
 


First, a typical Bible study class can take a year to a year and a half to complete, so if you're expecting to get "quick answers" from a conspiracy website, good luck with that.

Secondly, if you really wanted to learn about the Bible and Truth, you would be studying the Bible with a Bible Study class, with a scholastic approach, not trolling websites on the internet. Especially websites dominated by heathens. That's like going to Satan and asking him to tell you about God. Not a very reliable resource.




posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by impaired
 





And yes - for the record - I believe your Yahweh was/is an ET


So you think that the Creator of all that is was an Extra terrestrial creature? Or you mean that the being Yahweh is just a word for ET and not a word describing the Creator of the Universe? I'm guessing Hebrews would disagree with both of those interpretations.
Perhaps what you really meant is that you believe David Icke and Jim Marrs interpretations that the god of the bible was really the Sumerian gods who were extra terrestrial beings who experimented with the DNA of the humans they encountered on earth. But that still does not account for the actual creation of all that is. Scientifically minded people are often more comfortable with the evolution theory perhaps because they can explain away the mystery of Creation with a rational theory.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


Elohim is not a plural of God. It refers to the God of the southern kingdom of David, or El as it is known by another name. The priests were known as either the Shiloh or Aaronid priests. (honestly I can't remember which one is which, but the God of the Northern Kingdom was Jehovah)

That is what Bible scholars teach, not what is doctrine of the many faiths of the protestant denominations.

It is speculated by some that Elohim could mean many Gods, but that would blow a hole right through the new covenant.
El was the God of Abraham and the Canaanites.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. You may recall Jesus on the cross saying "Eloi, Eloi, ...." calling God, singular. The Hebrew word for God in Genesis (see Strongs Exhaustive Concordance, on Google) is elohim. Compare serpah (singular) to seraphim (plural) and cherub (singular) to cherubim (plural).



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


I am sorry Jim Scott, but I have to throw this one at you.

Logically, what you are doing is called circular reasoning.

You are using the bible to prove the validity of the bible.

OR...

It could also be stated as...

You are using the Gospel of Thomas to disprove the validity of the Gospel of Thomas.

Circular reasoning.

I was referring to actual proof. Some sort of outside account at the very least, similar to the account of Josephus.

And even if I were to accept your argument as plausible, then if I were to apply the same reasoning to the Pentateuch concerning the number of contradictory doublets it contains, then the validity of the bible is not proven.

Why do people want to believe an account so badly that all logic and reason will be put to the side in order to validate this belief?
In research theory we call this researcher bias.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by General.Lee
reply to post by ChaosComplex
 


First, a typical Bible study class can take a year to a year and a half to complete, so if you're expecting to get "quick answers" from a conspiracy website, good luck with that.

Secondly, if you really wanted to learn about the Bible and Truth, you would be studying the Bible with a Bible Study class, with a scholastic approach, not trolling websites on the internet. Especially websites dominated by heathens. That's like going to Satan and asking him to tell you about God. Not a very reliable resource.



this is probably the most sensible comment on this thread!



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by General.Lee
reply to post by ChaosComplex
 


First, a typical Bible study class can take a year to a year and a half to complete, so if you're expecting to get "quick answers" from a conspiracy website, good luck with that.

Secondly, if you really wanted to learn about the Bible and Truth, you would be studying the Bible with a Bible Study class, with a scholastic approach, not trolling websites on the internet. Especially websites dominated by heathens. That's like going to Satan and asking him to tell you about God. Not a very reliable resource.


I recommend you just sit down and read it. I did when I was 16. Took me a week during Christmas vacation. It gave me a feeling for the personality and intentions of God, and of His love for us. After you do that, go back and study with a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance and look up the words. Ask what each sentence means, and why God put it there. Color code your readings with verses that stand out to you. Pray for understanding. Pray for tolerance, patience, and forgiveness. Approach humbly and with thanksgiving to God, and He will open your understanding. Good luck.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arare
I am terribly confused with something here and I hope someone can clear this up because for 15 years trying to get answers for many religious people(family,close friends,my ex's) from various religions but mainly the following:

1.Most denominations of Christianity.
2.Sikhism
3.Islam

Nobody was ever interested in providing me with an intelligent answer and I was usually met with ridicule and scorn.All I got was passive aggressive hate.They just thought I was crazy and should not be questioning the established order of specific systems and religions.

But all men are flawed,theist and atheist alike and both sides can make really stupid arguments to support their beliefs.But for today,this is for the theist out there.


If God is all knowing and all powerful since the beginning of time and creation and therefore the embodiment of everything , He would encompass every possible interaction ever conceived within His infinite consciousness.Not just the "good"(e.g love,justice,charity) but also the "bad"(e.g pain,hate,anger etc.).And everything else in between.

He would have foreseen the rise and fall of creation.He would have foreseen the glorious but prideful nature of Lucifer and his resulting fall from grace.He would have foreseen the serpent tempting Eve with the apple.He would have foreseen Judas betraying Jesus.Most importantly,he would have foreseen how each and everyone of us,even before the conception of our souls,would have lived our lives.How our experiences would have shaped us.How resulting interactions within our environment would also mold our personalities and attitudes to both the material and perhaps the spiritual.He would have understood if someone's desire was to do good but it only lead to evil.Or if the path of evil would have eventually led to good.

He would have understood if someone thought Buddhism was a ridiculous idea or if an individual believed that Christ lived for our sins instead of dying for it.He would have understood why a radical Islamic terrorist would have done what he did by blowing himself up near innocent families with their children around.He would have also understood that if an individual made sense of the universe an atheist,that it was perfectly acceptable because that very idea would have also been God's idea as well(remember,He encompasses everything).Yeah wrap your head around that,God may be an atheist too =P.

And He allowed it all to happen and continues to allow it happen.Why?Because it is obvious that God (and even me and you) know that every single one of our experiences is so radically different from each other's.Our interpretation and how we understand the world is dependent wholly on these experiences.Think for a moment how you came to believe what you currently believe.A series of events lead you there.A very long series of events.

Is there a right one?Perhaps there is only one?Some argue yes,but by doing that are you not limiting what God can and cannot do?How do you know your Bible,the Quran,The Guru Granth Sahib,The Nag Hamaddi text are divinely inspired?They all share similarities as they also can greatly contradict one another.While they alleviate God....to well..God,they also humanize him and that greatly limits the entire idea of God and therefore,limiting the understanding of God.

The moment,you say that yours is the only way ,are you not degrading God ?




edit on 21-3-2011 by Arare because: (no reason given)


I'm not sure I found a question in all of that, seemed more like a statement, well except that last line.

For future reference, ask the question first, without so much framing... kind of clouds the issue and creates debate where you probably didn't intend it.

To answer your question (I'm a United Methodist, "born again" as of 2004):
-Yes. But it goes even further than that. We degrade God by our very being. We degrade God by our actions and thoughts. But God has given Grace to that affront and deemed humanity of a value that we shouldn't be wiped from existence simply because we suck.

Explanation: man has this terrible nature to control and manipulate things. Given a divine truth - man tries to control and twist that truth to gain an advantage.

So here we get into the real "meat" of your question: Why do we do that? That's obviously not of God, and hence it's "sin"... so it must have come from somewhere else...

Being aware of evil doesn't always make us ready to cleanse it or remove it. While not a perfect allegory: look to human parent/child relationships. Very bad people have parents who love them and would give their own lives for them... because regardless of what you and I see in a person, their parents see immeasurable worth in that child.

So because God knew that we'd run amok... does he then make the decision that we're not worth the trouble? Obviously not.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jim Scott

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


Elohim is not a plural of God. It refers to the God of the southern kingdom of David, or El as it is known by another name. The priests were known as either the Shiloh or Aaronid priests. (honestly I can't remember which one is which, but the God of the Northern Kingdom was Jehovah)

That is what Bible scholars teach, not what is doctrine of the many faiths of the protestant denominations.

It is speculated by some that Elohim could mean many Gods, but that would blow a hole right through the new covenant.
El was the God of Abraham and the Canaanites.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. You may recall Jesus on the cross saying "Eloi, Eloi, ...." calling God, singular. The Hebrew word for God in Genesis (see Strongs Exhaustive Concordance, on Google) is elohim. Compare serpah (singular) to seraphim (plural) and cherub (singular) to cherubim (plural).


Again... circular reasoning.

When I post something, what I post is the belief of theologians regarding this issue.
I will not post the doctrine or dogma of certain fractured protestant faiths.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


This is not entirely true. It is important to give Mary her due without overdoing it as the Romans do. Mary is more than a woman who gave birth to the Christ (heretical Christokos doctrine refuted by the ecumenical councils) she is Theotokos: meaning God Bearer. Her obedience made the bridge between humanity and God when she gave birth to God the Son. No one but her was capable of it, if there had been, our Messiah would have been born from Sarah thousands of years earlier. She thus became the Ark of the New Covenant and the New Eve, we owe much to the Theotokos/ It is not wrong to revere her for what she did, but we do not worship her and neither do Roman Catholics. It is important to understand how big of a role she played in the redemption of mankind, this is why she is a part of our liturgy. Hail Marys are going too far in honoring her (draws attention away from God), but idolatry is a sin of intent and you can do hail Marys without accidentally worshipping her. There is a distinction between reverence and worship in Orthodoxy. You will be excommunicated if you worship Mary or worship icons and it has happened before.
edit on 21-3-2011 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   
You guys have fun with this.

If anyone wishes to actually engage in an academic discussion of this issue then, once AGAIN, I invite you to click on the link in my signature.

Hasta.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


I am sorry Jim Scott, but I have to throw this one at you.

Logically, what you are doing is called circular reasoning.

You are using the bible to prove the validity of the bible.

OR...

It could also be stated as...

You are using the Gospel of Thomas to disprove the validity of the Gospel of Thomas.

Circular reasoning.

I was referring to actual proof. Some sort of outside account at the very least, similar to the account of Josephus.

And even if I were to accept your argument as plausible, then if I were to apply the same reasoning to the Pentateuch concerning the number of contradictory doublets it contains, then the validity of the bible is not proven.

Why do people want to believe an account so badly that all logic and reason will be put to the side in order to validate this belief?
In research theory we call this researcher bias.


The Bible is the most proven ancient text on Earth. It has been substantiated with over 30,000 copies, and over 50,000 archeological discoveries. It is the most ancient of texts with copies closer to their original autographs than any other texts in existence. On the contrary, I suggest you prove that the other texts are valid. Mankind has already proven the Bible is valid and reliable.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
"What? Let US make? In OUR image? After OUR likeness? What the... How can no one have an issue with this?"

And you say your not trying to bash or flame? This is unacceptable...



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Mystery_Lady
 


Your first line is wrong, so why would I read anything you stated? I'm devoutly literalistic Christian. So no. I don't believe your statement because of what science says, and the bible does not agree with it either. The spirit of Jesus is in you and what you do. Again, it's an analogy. A parallel. How do you keep within what is infinity greater than you? Simple. You do not. it overflows out of you and into others in what you do, if you have Christ within. Having the light of Christ does not mean physics light and scientific meaning. no. It means it is shining off of you. It cannot all fit in you, so it flows into other things. This is why both light and water are used as analogies. Forget about physics and the laws of the universe. They are nothing to do with the spirit. The universe only has one law: die. Everything the universe does is to destroy and kill you, everything you make, and everything you are made up of. This is in complete contrast to what God is. And it's our fault. We brought it into the world.

There is a host of silliness about your story. I am happy you do not believe it. But please read on to learn why it's so wrong.

A: Aliens would not be human nor humanoid. Nor would they communicate so easily with humans. If they even could communicate with us in any sensible manner to begin with. In fact, in realistic terms, we would only be able to communicate with trade and emotion. Again that assumes they even know about trade, or even have emotions.And the language would not be mathematical. Math would just prove you are intelligent. It would be chemical, with each molecule and its unique properties being an emotion or feeling. Hydrogen being stable but explosive when heated up, noble gases being apathy and not caring, indifferent. Carbon being agreeable and bond able. Floride being reactive and hot wired. Radioactive elements would be unstable, poisonous, expansionist, and dangerous. I'd give a guess we would be described as one of those.

Second, why on Earth would an agreement give birth to a solar system? lol. if you can create solar systems, you don't fight wars. You just send a gravity tachyon wave at your enemy and destroy all their star systems, and then rebuild the ruins. If you can give birth to solar systems, you are not going to be fighting wars with space ships and armies. That's just hilariously silly. Again, it's clearly fake, because humans fight wars with armies and ships. This is how one indicates something as being real or fake. From a religious point of view, the fact that the Hebrew God of the bible is so uncomprehending and not like humanity proves he is real, but this is not definite proof. just common sense. This is where the word Holy comes from. To be separate.

Aliens would not make people. They would make robots. Why on Earth would they give a damn about their workers complaining and then just make more of them to complain. Again, dumb. You would make robots that don't complain, do work, and get out of the way.

OH YES! Indeed aliens would be satanic. This is why Satan is called the king of the sky. Ever wonder where the nephilim came from or went? That's not to say they all are. That's to say that if Satan was cast down onto Earth, without a flesh and only just a tempter, then he cannot leave Earth but for possessing someone, and getting off it from there.

Indeed what is more likely is that aliens are not as intelligent as humans. They've just been here so long that they advanced linear through trial and error. Eventually one of them found Earth, documented it, took note of its strangeness, and left.

there are clues to Earth once being great after man was cast out. Why did Noah only have 3 sons in a time when people should have dozens? Why is the literal translation of Noah's ark's wood plywood, even though plywood wasn't invented until the 1900s? Think about it. Tree of knowledge? If God is outside of time, then the tree of knowledge had everything we would ever learn as a species, all put into Adam's head. Add in 900 years of life and that man with his descendants built the greatest empire on Earth before the flood. This is why, again, it is said that the end times won't come until the world is like the world before the flood. We will come full circle, and be where we were originally.
edit on 21-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Josephus23

Originally posted by Jim Scott

Originally posted by Josephus23
reply to post by Jim Scott
 


Elohim is not a plural of God. It refers to the God of the southern kingdom of David, or El as it is known by another name. The priests were known as either the Shiloh or Aaronid priests. (honestly I can't remember which one is which, but the God of the Northern Kingdom was Jehovah)

That is what Bible scholars teach, not what is doctrine of the many faiths of the protestant denominations.

It is speculated by some that Elohim could mean many Gods, but that would blow a hole right through the new covenant.
El was the God of Abraham and the Canaanites.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. You may recall Jesus on the cross saying "Eloi, Eloi, ...." calling God, singular. The Hebrew word for God in Genesis (see Strongs Exhaustive Concordance, on Google) is elohim. Compare serpah (singular) to seraphim (plural) and cherub (singular) to cherubim (plural).


Again... circular reasoning.

When I post something, what I post is the belief of theologians regarding this issue.
I will not post the doctrine or dogma of certain fractured protestant faiths.


With all due respect, I find theologians misguided. Theologians claim that very little in the New Testament is actually true. Jesus says these folks are "ever learning and never coming to a knowledge of the truth" and cautions us to beware of wolves in sheep's clothing who would destroy the flock.
edit on 3/21/2011 by Jim Scott because: amplification



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Let’s see, you’re having difficulty understanding the bible’s meaning of words from the start. If you want debate and differences of opinions, then you came to the right place. If you want true understanding then you’ll need the following; A concordance, time, evaluation of the times that different books were written in it, and you just might want to start with how the bible came to be in the first place; ( It’s more than interesting, and 200 or so years after the “during Jesus’ time” story )… but mostly you’ll need spiritual understanding that comes with much study outside the physical plane. You might also want to check all that against Gnostic teachings and early man’s philosophy. Understanding the bible will only teach you to be confused, and to go along with the program, even if it is hypocrisy. If you go by what others tell you, then you’ve missed the point entirely, and would be placing trust with their opinions. However, to answer your first questions, you must first understand that the word God has the meaning of (God, false God) which is simple enough to find using a concordance and the meaning of the word as it was intended in it’s original text.

Below are a few links which should give you more than enough to get started. Good luck.

www.apostolic-churches.net...

www.gnosis.org...

www.world-mysteries.com...



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by General.Lee
reply to post by ChaosComplex
 


First, a typical Bible study class can take a year to a year and a half to complete, so if you're expecting to get "quick answers" from a conspiracy website, good luck with that.

Secondly, if you really wanted to learn about the Bible and Truth, you would be studying the Bible with a Bible Study class, with a scholastic approach, not trolling websites on the internet. Especially websites dominated by heathens. That's like going to Satan and asking him to tell you about God. Not a very reliable resource.


Seriously?



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by gncnew
 


Therein lies my question,that this sin that is within us all,how is it not of God as well?If God is indeed the Alpha and the Omega,he is embodiment of absolutely everything we can ever fathom ,even sin.It can't be the Devil because the angel Lucifer was the creation of God.Sure one would argue that his resulting fall lead to sin but if God was all powerful,He knew that that was going to happen.I mean,He is God,after all.

Religious text tell me that God is everything but then they contradict themselves by saying He is only love.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by InnerstellarOne
 


your truth may not be my truth or the truth



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I think I can sum up this 30 page thread with this video clip, I think Interstellarone will approve....



Watch This Video


Sorry I couldn't embed the video, Embedding disabled by request.

Thought I'd interject a little humor to lighten the discussion a bit......


Ok.... Carry on



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by agentblue
 





Thank you jimscott for making the point I have been trying to make for the last ten years to my wife's family to whom are catholic. I actually refused them to say their hail marys in my house because afterall it is my house and won't let them pray to mary in my home in the idea that they could defile my abode. Whether I am right or wrong it is my judgement that is at stake. If they don't like it they can leave. They don't have to come to my house to eat nor do I have to listen to them


Well don't you sound like the loving husband and father....not! More like controlling dictator. You feel that your opinion is the only one acceptable because it's "your" house. You completely fail in understanding your role as father and husband and the subordinate role woman has in "your" household. I believe there is a difference between teaching your family, and making them believe as you do. You are doomed to failure in any case. In my view they would be wise NOT to go back to your house and eat with you. Personally, I believe in the Marianic visions. You seem to subscribe to some bizarre idea that Mary was somehow inferior, even though she was the "Mother of God". Even the Church had to make her seem inferior by reducing her ascension to that of the "assumption" so they could perpetuate the Patriarchal society based on man's dominance. Do you not understand that you are 40 % female? You would be wise to learn to apprciate the Divine Feminine part of yourself.
Oh, and if you want a real traditional Christian view of marriage, try the books of Helen and Aubrey Andelin, at least you would be developing the Velvet side of manhood... www.amazon.com...
edit on 21-3-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: sp




top topics



 
47
<< 27  28  29    31  32  33 >>

log in

join