My first issues with the Bible.

reply to post by TKDRL


I know,your right

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by lilly1

 

Sorry to break it to you, but this is a forum, discussion and debate will go on reguardless of capslock #fits tossed into the fray

edit on Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:37:23 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

But not if the God people are correct.

reply to post by marsend


Well that was a vague reply in deed. Care to elaborate on that thought?

reply to post by ag893


Can you prove that unequivocally? And, no, faith doesn't count. So I am an idiot because I accept that the human species, as well as most modern primates, had one ancestor? So, it's ok that we came from dirt, an inanimate object, but not ok that mine and some chimpanzee's great-to 1,000th power-grandfather were the same? I mean, if Genesis was the truth, don't you think God would have thrown in something about the dinosaurs whose remains we were sure to find in the future? Oh, right, that was Satan playing a trick on us and littering the landscape to fool us lowly humans. And I am not even touching on the obviously incestuous relationships that got us to this point.

So to sum up, incestuous dirt people good. Humans, who share something like 99% of our DNA with other primates in the animal kingdom, and primates comming from a common ancestor bad. You know, I would be a lot more spiritual if it weren't for Bible literalists, and those who reject everything except what's in the Bible. I mean, when is the last time anyone was put to death for eating shellfish?

Originally posted by autowrench

Serpent could mean reptillian or snake, as in traitor. Traitor because he went 'astray' from the plan for the Earth mission; they were to fashion slaves in their likings but to keep us dumb so that we remained slaves, and Lucifer wanted to enlighten us

Right on! I have often thought this. People tell me Lucifer is the Father of all lies, and the Devil, and is the enemy of God almighty, etc, etc. I have read the Bible, in fact, several of them. I even have a copy of the Koran, and the Kabbalah. I have never read of one instance when Lucifer/Satan harmed, lied to, killed, or stole from even one human being. In the Edin (correct spelling) story, the Serpent "deceives" Eve, and uses his wiles to get her to eat from the Tree. I don't see it that way at all. The "Tree" they are talking about I believe is the Lotus Plant.

Lotus - plant profile Names Lotus, sacred lotus, Indian lotus, Chinese water lily, Egyptian bean (English) Kanwal, kamal (Hindi) Ambuja, padma, pankaja, kamala (Sanskrit) Padma (Bengal) Suriyakamal (Gujarat) Ambal, thamarai (Tamil) Botanical name: Nelumbo nucifera Family: Nelumbonaceae. Nelumbo is the only genus in this family.

source

The Island of the Lotus Eaters

Psychedelia Past, Present and Future

In any case, the Serpent did not tell a lie, God did, in fact. God told Eve and Adam that they would Die if they ate from the tree. they ate, but did not die. who then is the liar here? Mankind was not made to be anything but a slave. Original man, the Adama, could not interbreed, could not even communicate with each other. I believe it was Inanna, and Thoth who brought knowledge to man/womankind with the ME devices, which I take to be computers of some kind, digital storage devices. All roads lead to Ancient Sumer.

Errr... What about Job? Satan definately had a hand in that one.

Also, God did not lie when he said that Adam would die when he ate of the tree. He most certainly did die. That is why the Nachash (the serpent;Satan) wanted him to eat of the tree, it adopted sin into human nature and the wages of sin is separation from God the source of life which results in death. God didn't say "If you eat of the tree, I will kill you" he said "when you eat of the tree you will die", he was stating a fact. By eating of the tree, mankind came under the dominion of sin, death, and the devil. For an infraction there is a law against it, which is why the Mosaic law came about. The culmination of the Mosaic law was the birth of the Messiah by the Theotokos, the Virgin Mary. Mary's obedience and synergy with the will of God undid the results of the disobedience of Eve by making a bridge between Humankind and the Divine. The Word was made flesh, kept the law, passed a new covenant to His followers, and died. Because Ya'hshuah Messiah was blameless, divine, and immortal, Sheol could not hold him and death was abolished so that mankind could return to the Father and be one in Him.

Bearing in mind the ramifications of the fall, how can you not see Satan as a murderer? He has the blood of every human from Adam to Ya'hshuah on his hands and bloodies them to this day by leading people away from the path into life.

As far as Sumerian beliefs vs. Judeo-Christian beliefs, of course there are similarities! Abram was called out of Ur in Sumeria. The fact that Moses transcribed stories so similar to Sumerian stories hundreds of years after the fall of Sumeria lends further credence to antiquity claims of the Jews. You will notice a plethora of similar information from flood stories to "gods" violating their stations and making hybrid monsters with human women. Sumer is thought to be the cradle of civilization and provided the world with the first system of writing (not pictographs). The fact that the Jews come from such a society gives them a special place in antiquity. The Sumerian Kings List also lends credence to the belief that the early humans lived for centuries as described in Genesis. However, there is an age bias among ATSers towards the Sumerian writings being superior. An older document does not make it more accurate, especially if you factor in the possibility of divine revelation (talk to a Muslim about the Koran and Bible). Look at the Genesis flood story and the Epic of Gilgamesh for example. Very very similar stories, the main difference between the two being polytheism vs. monotheism and the reliability of details. In the Gilgamesh flood story, the dimensions given the Ark "don't hold water" in that it simply would not work on a raging sea (it would have looked like a giant box or a coracle, neither of which would work on the open sea). On the other hand, the dimensions given to Noah's Ark are ideal even by modern standards. Furthermore, people who state that it would be impossible for Noah's large family to provide a gene pool large enough for the human race to continue not only ignore the geneaological bottleneck mankind went through in the past, but hints in the Bible that point to other survivors: "There were giants on the Earth in those days and also after that"

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by marsend

 

Well that was a vague reply in deed. Care to elaborate on that thought?

Yes it was vague, my reply was in reference to a part in the sentence "discussion and debate will go on reguardless" I figured it would not go on, if the God people are right, as they say that it all ends, based on their book, which has been written and rewritten several times

Let us say that in a thousand years, once our civilization has been and gone and the only thing they find is a book called the Hobbit written by JR Tolkin, will the new civilization be dumb enough to believe and to buy in it, other than it being a story.

reply to post by marsend


Oh lol, armageddon, or whatever it's called, yeah I suppose that will at least stop the debate on earth lol. I suppose then we would all be chilling in heaven or hell bickering there too if they are right though

reply to post by autowrench


Sadly .AutoWrench that will not happen. Humans have been fighting over religious beliefs for who knows how long. Wars fought in God's name.....So much killing and murder to vindicate their belief. Even the writers of the Bible let their biased opinions get in the way of their hatred of their enemies.This verse is a very good example of that.
I Samuel 15:3..
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not: but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
That is an extremely disturbing paragraph. This verse could bring you to tears, because it says that God only loved a certain group of people and cared none for the other children. And a God who doesnot care for children, but go out and slay them all? Does that sound right to you? And there are many more that are equally stressful to read. Yes, I have read the Bible and other Bibles too.
Does God need anyone to fight his battles for him? Then if God loves all his children, does he tell one child to go out and slay the children of another? I think not.

reply to post by ellieN


Context: go find it.
Read the Bible and see what the Amalekites did to the Israelites. I'm tired of doing research for lazy people.

Originally posted by ellieN
reply to post by autowrench

 

Sadly .AutoWrench that will not happen. Humans have been fighting over religious beliefs for who knows how long. Wars fought in God's name.....So much killing and murder to vindicate their belief. Even the writers of the Bible let their biased opinions get in the way of their hatred of their enemies.This verse is a very good example of that.
I Samuel 15:3..
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not: but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
That is an extremely disturbing paragraph. This verse could bring you to tears, because it says that God only loved a certain group of people and cared none for the other children. And a God who doesnot care for children, but go out and slay them all? Does that sound right to you? And there are many more that are equally stressful to read. Yes, I have read the Bible and other Bibles too.
Does God need anyone to fight his battles for him? Then if God loves all his children, does he tell one child to go out and slay the children of another? I think not.

the old testament KICKS ASS!

Originally posted by kallisti36
reply to post by ellieN

 

Context: go find it.
Read the Bible and see what the Amalekites did to the Israelites. I'm tired of doing research for lazy people.

Yes they did...so to you ...you think that justifies the verse.? I think not.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

You've got to be joking if you're asking that question. John 3:36 comes to mind, along with dozens of others.

I tell you what, do your own research. here, go and search simply the word life here and read it yourself.

www.biblegateway.com...


Better yet, where does Christ teach in multiple lives besides the one you have now and the eternal one after?

edit on 22-3-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

That is not good enough. What BS Gorman, it's the same silly tactics you tried on the Kunalini thread. You throw out some illogical piece of nonsense that everyones bs meter can detect, and when you cannot defend your position you expect others to do the research. No, I asked you to defend your position that Jesus taught there is only one life. Now you do your own research to back it up.
And you know what? There's more biblical evidence for Jesus believing in reincarnation than there is in him teaching you only live once. The whole living once and then going to heaven or hell is just fabrication. You can thank the Emperor of Rome for anathematizing Origen.
"Reincarnation and the Secret Teachings of Jesus

There are many Bible verses that affirm the reality of reincarnation. We will examine some of them here.

The episode in the Bible where Jesus identified John the Baptist as the reincarnation of Elijah the prophet is one of the clearest statements which Jesus made concerning reincarnation.


For all the prophets and the law have prophesied until John. And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who was to come. (Matt. 11:13-14)"
"

In the above passage, Jesus clearly identifies John the Baptist as the reincarnation of Elijah the prophet. Later in Matthew's gospel Jesus reiterates it.


And the disciples asked him, saying, "Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?"


But he answered them and said, "Elijah indeed is to come and will restore all things. But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and they did not know him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also shall the Son of Man suffer at their hand."


Then the disciples understood that he had spoken of John the Baptist." (Matt. 17:10-13) "

"In very explicit language, Jesus identified John the Baptist as the reincarnation of Elijah. Even the disciples of Jesus understood what Jesus was saying. This identification of John to be the reincarnation of Elijah is very important when it comes to Bible prophecy. By identifying the John with Elijah, Jesus identified himself as the Messiah. The Hebrew scriptures mentions specific signs that would precede the coming of the Messiah. One of them is that Elijah will return first.


Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. (Mal. 4:5)"
www.near-death.com...

I can find tons of other blogs and books where people agree with this viewpoint.
OK Gorman, your turn to prove your point.

John 3:36 this passage? John 3:36 (King James Version)

36He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
Tell me exactly how this is a statement of one life only? It is a statement of everlasting life indeed. There is no indication of One Life however. Perhaps its closer to Revelation in that the seed of the wicked are judged in the final days. It is no indication whatsoever that this was their only incarnation.



]

to quote properly
[quote]what you want to quote[/quote]
Except change the ] to a ]

I wish code tags worked here, it would be way easier to show lol. Does that make sense? I can't tell who is saying what when it is just one giant quote box like that.

reply to post by kallisti36


you should read the book called "THE HIRAM KEY" ,you will never again use the bible as a spiritual guide or reference to the past.

reply to post by lilly1


Sounds like esoteric Freemason revisionist history. Hiram Abiff is a footnote in the Bible.
Addendum: Oh yes, it definitely is. Loose connections between archaeological finds and Freemasonic legends that they pulled out of a decorative hat are strung together with suppositions to make *drumroll* The Davinci Code 2: Electric Boogaloo.

reply to post by TKDRL


I just accidentally deleted the end of his post where it says he edited it, and that's how it turned out so I went back to his original post and got the edit from it.

reply to post by ellieN


God doesn't punish because he demands satisfaction for crimes. This is Roman Catholic juridical thinking that has plagued Western Christianity for a millenia. The whole point of God's actions in the OT from the giving of the Law to the destruction of his peoples' would-be destroyers to his chastisement of his wayward people was to repair the gap between Man and God. Why wouldn't he punish the people who keep sabotaging the bridge? Now the Messiah has come and established a Way to return to the Father. The Gates of Hades cannot prevail against this bridge now and punishment is no longer necessary. We are now called to return to the Father or to turn from him and be consumed in the flames of his glory (Heaven and Hell are the same place with two different mindsets).

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Awesome, thanks for fixing it. Easier for folks to wrap their heads around this way.