What I dont like about the Bible (NKJIV)....

It seems like to me, every otther verse is talking about a sinner and Gods wrath to collect payment for that sin. Its constantly repeating threats from God that are repeated over and over throughout the entire story, all books. Then when you actually get out in the real world none of that stuff happens. People just rip people off and hurt them their entire lives and in their desperateness they cling to the Bible because its the only thing they have. I guess it makes them feel better like "its ok because Gods got my back against the sinners" but then they go out and the Bible cant protect them (ive witnessed it personally) they just keep saying "one day I tell you! one day!" then they just keep waiting for justice and they die lol. What a joke anyone elose feel this way?

Also if an afterlife that we all share truly existed, I wouldnt want to spend it with half these heathens im made to associate with. I mean to the point that if it meant being cast out of heaven id be ok with it. None of todays slime deserves a place in heaven. All thats left is the garbage anyway

Of course it is complete nonsense, it is a control method. At the highest levels the priests are initiated into the mysteries, Jesus himself was educated in an Egyptian mystery school. I kind of like the theory that he was the son of Cleopatra and simply proclaimed himself as holy to reclaim his empire which would make sense considering

120-130

Basilides, a "heresiarch" (Gnostic) of Alexandria is supposed to have written twenty-four commentaries on the Gospels, wherein he claimed that Jesus did not die on the cross and that a substitute, Simon of Cyrene, took his place. The Koran held the same argument in the seventh century.

www.phils.com.au...

Prince Charles of course says he is a descendant of Jesus, so the main stream belief is garbage.

Here is some nice pictures showing illuminati/bablyonian/egyptian symbology throughout the Christain church, orthodox as well.
www.whale.to...

Originally posted by strangedays
...every other verse is talking about a sinner and Gods wrath to collect payment for that sin.
..repeating threats from God that are repeated over and over throughout the entire story, all books.
Then when you actually get out in the real world none of that stuff happens.
People just rip people off and hurt them their entire lives and in their desperateness they cling to the Bible because its the only thing they have.
....but then they go out and the Bible cant protect them (ive witnessed it personally) they just keep saying "one day I tell you! one day!" then they just keep waiting for justice and they die lol.
Also if an afterlife that we all share truly existed,
None of todays slime deserves a place in heaven. :

Man do you see the glass half empty or what?
The Bible need not be interpreted so literally. Our reality is made up of positive and negative, male female, north south heaven and hell, spiritual and logical, good intentions and bad, the examples are endless. To deny these natural dualities is counter intuitive.

I see the Bible as recording and processing examples of these daily life dualities and the lesson that prevail from acting accordingly to them. The reason they are negative is because of our propensity to F things up. Look at the final goals of the teachings from all these contributions. It is to love in a universal way, forgive, be kind to one another, live an upstanding life, service to others, finding joy and bringing joy, etc.

The teachings from the new testament have caused much harm due to their perversion and miss interpretation however to say the world is better off without them seems wrong to me. The intention of Jesus' teachings were to allow for a more peaceful and compassionate world. To say Jesus was ahead of his time is a gross understatement, as we are still trying to get what he said, and practiced, right. Despite all the historical rhetoric and mystery regarding Jesus and the claims made about him being this or that, Son of God or not, etc.,he was most well known as a teacher and healer, first and foremost. He gave the world around him a new paradigm of life skills. These qualities made a stir within and around his communities enough to record it and put it into action, and spread and prevail over time. The outcomes of living his advice is what makes the Bible important as a kind of text book not a set of commandments to be blindly followed and literally interpreted.

wiki.answers.com...

Was King James a homosexual?

When King James-I was about age 14-15, he was seduced by a homosexual, French Nobleman, Esme Stuart d' Aubigny, who was a distant relative visiting the young "orphan King" and was 24 years his senior. (His father was killed after James' birth, his mother in prison for decades). The affair became so serious that advisers to King James ran the relative out of the country, and threatened him with death if he returned.

He had many male lovers hie whole life, and the crowds commonly yelled "Queen James!" as he rode through the streets of London.

He was called out by the British Parliament in later years about his blatantly public homosexual behaviour, to which he gave a most notable answer: He accused Jesus Christ of having young John His disciple (probably age 17-19) for his male lover, hence the origin of calling such sexual partners "Johns".

When questioned, King James declared to the Privy Council:

"I, James, am neither a god nor an angel, but a man like any other. Therefore I act like a man and confess ... that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else,... (his long term lover whom he often called "Wife" in public);

I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, For Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George

King James was buried between two homosexual lovers in his mausoleum, George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham (1592-1628) on his left hand and Ludovic Stuart, Duke of Richmond and Lennox (1574-1624). His tomb is a tourist attraction in London today.

There is a great host of his openly homosexual personal letters still extant, as well as quotes from other world figures, either rebuking or supporting his gay activities.

Read more: wiki.answers.com...

What I dont like about the Bible (NKJIV)

What I LIKE about it ... it's named after a drunken flaming homosexual and yet all the fundamentalists cling to it like it's pure and came down directly from Heaven or something. They haven't got a clue ... I find it amusing.

reply to post by strangedays


Okay I get what you're saying.

I only focus on the words and teachings of Jesus and he wasn't talking about this world. He was talking about spiritual things using natural things as examples so the people back in that time would understand. But it's not about earthly stuff. It's about heavenly things. He's talking to your spirit. Not your brain.

reply to post by FlyersFan


First of all King James interpreted it, he didn't write it.

Secondly, if King James was going to abuse his authority of interpretation, don't you think he would have "misinterpreted" anything that was written about homosexuality?

life on earth - 1 to 120 years approx
life with god - 0 to infinity

You cant even suffer and be patience for 120 years to be with him for forever ?

No, I'm not even Christian, your lack of faith is disturbing.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

First of all King James interpreted it, he didn't write it.

Secondly, if King James was going to abuse his authority of interpretation, don't you think he would have "misinterpreted" anything that was written about homosexuality?

Your question was answered in the same link I quoted in my first post. All you had to do was click the link and look

wiki.answers.com...

KING JAMES VERSION the PRO-HOMOSEXUAL BIBLE:

That King James-I was such an ardent homosexual accounts for a motivation to "waste" so much tax money "re-translating" the Holy Bible. In his Pro-Gay KJV Version, he erased 26 "anti-homosexual references in the Greek language" . . . and every such denunciation by Christ Himself, inserting words benign to homosexuals.

It was not until 1946 that this blatant changing of God's word was realized, and the Revised Version re-inserted the clear admonitions against homosexuality.

Amazingly, the Conservative Bible Christians almost worship King James equal to Christ - with many claiming in most unbelievable ignorance - that a person can't be a Christian without using the King James Bible - equally ignorant of the fact that their "Hero King James" was homosexual of the most blatant degree which they detest.

Such ignorance is beyond comprehension. No wonder Christianity is dying in the Western World.

Read more: wiki.answers.com...

So then, the consensus of at least two of our members is, gays are incapable of insuring a good scholarly work is done? Otherwise, King James is acceptable? That's pretty hard core Kryties and Flyersfan. Or are you strictly referring to the irony of a gay king commissioning the translation of scripture, and putting his name on it?

The KJV may very well be one of the best English translations we have of the majority text. It has its own set of problems admittedly, but at least it doesn't remove chapters, verses, and words that are in the majority of manuscripts we have. Unlike other modern translations.

OP. Without the biblical doctrine of our worthlessness and our innate sinfulness, the Christian faith has no way to double-bind its literal adherents for a lifetime. Verses like...

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"
"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
"But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags"

And the coup de gras:

"But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us".
(This verse almost exemplifies the double-bind all by itself.)

It is verses such as these that tell you how much God loves you in spite of how worthless you are, and if you'll just admit you are a worm, and have committed atrocities against God, he'll save you as long as you hang with him. But if you don't, you are done. To hell with you.

reply to post by strangedays

Since we don't know what happens after death doesn't it help to hedge our bets?

Some people are frightened about the process. It's only natural.

There are those who would take advantage of superstition. It works very well for the Catholics.

reply to post by Klassified


Wow, didn't you get me completely wrong.

The purpose of my posting is to show up the hypocrisy of Christians, particularly those who proclaim the KJV is the only one worth reading.

Sorry that this blatantly obvious point went completely over your head.

reply to post by Kryties


Except your link failed to produce any proof that King James changed the original text and that it was all changed back in 1946.

reply to post by Kryties


Homosexual? I think his kids would haven taken issue with that. Best you could argue is he was bi-sexual, but modern scholars don't even argue that anymore usually. Apparently it now appears all that got started by some guy that just wanted to get revenge on him or something. But whatever. Who knows. Anyway it's the whole concept I don't understand. If a bi-sexual purchases a Bible you're saying that Bible is a bad translation?

Like if a gay guy walks into the store and buys a Bible all of a sudden the translation becomes crap? Wait, let me guess? You don't get what I'm talking about? Yeah probably not. Let me explain.

See, King James didn't do the translation. You know that right? He commission it or PURCHASED IT. He had nothing to do with translating it. 47 Scholars translated it for HIM to buy basically. It's like saying McDonald's hamburgers are bad because I don't know how to cook (which I can't really). But who cares? I'm not the one cooking it. I'm the one buying the burger lol.

The most you could say is since he commissioned it that it is somehow biased to his world view. Which is strange because all the anti-gray versus are kinda still in there? Seems weird for a homosexual to edit the Bible and still leave the all gays go to Hell part in there.

Or you're saying what? They fixed it later? So now it's fixed? Wouldn't that make it a good translation again? Exactly what are you claiming his assumed bi-sexuality caused the 47 translators to translate differently?

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Klassified

 

Wow, didn't you get me completely wrong.

The purpose of my posting is to show up the hypocrisy of Christians, particularly those who proclaim the KJV is the only one worth reading.

Sorry that this blatantly obvious point went completely over your head.

I didn't miss it Kryties. I just couldn't resist. You and Flyersfan left yourselves wide open.

All I am doing is posting the facts. Knock yourselves out debating them by all means.

Originally posted by Klassified

I didn't miss it Kryties. I just couldn't resist. You and Flyersfan left yourselves wide open.

Fair call I got a bit lazy, it won't happen again!

Besides maybe Ecclesiastes, the bible is very badly written.

Originally posted by Deetermined
, if King James was going to abuse his authority of interpretation, ...

I didn't say he abused his authority. I said that I like that it's named after a drunken homosexual. Two things that fundamentalists don't like, but their bible is named after a fella who indulged in both. I find it amusing.

Originally posted by Klassified
gays are incapable of insuring a good scholarly work is done? Otherwise, King James is acceptable? That's pretty hard core Kryties and Flyersfan.

WHERE on earth do you come up with that from? Not even close.

Or are you strictly referring to the irony of a gay king commissioning the translation of scripture, and putting his name on it?

Now you are getting warmer. I think it's a hoot that fundamentalists are anti-homosexual and anti-alcoholic-drinking .. but the bible that they hold dear is named for a gay person who drank. It's funny. That's all.

Originally posted by trustnothing
I kind of like the theory that he was the son of Cleopatra and simply proclaimed himself as holy to reclaim his empire which would make sense considering

:shk: Christ clearly said His kingdom wasn't of this world. Read the gospels.

Originally posted by tinfoilman
Homosexual? I think his kids would haven taken issue with that.

Gay and bi people cover and have kids all the time. It's not that hard to do.

reply to post by strangedays


Oh, that's why.
I figured because it is a book written by man to control the masses and give them a sense of purpose so they will kill for you.
It is also rewritten every few years to update the current culture, so as to keep the people in line.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Now you are getting warmer. I think it's a hoot that fundamentalists are anti-homosexual and anti-alcoholic-drinking .. but the bible that they hold dear is named for a gay person who drank. It's funny. That's all.

I guess, but it's hate the sin, love the sinner right? It's a reoccurring theme in the Bible how God works through people.

Doesn't matter who's name was on it, you'd have the same problem. Like if I had a translation done. Then what you would have? A Bible by an ex thief? Whoo hoo! Not much better unless Jesus comes down and translates one himself.

Moses was a murderer. David an adulterer. Noah a drunk. So and so on. Jesus and the prostitute and all that?

Then again I'm not a KJV only person. I usually use whatever and if something is confusing cross reference it with another translation. Any other translation, doesn't matter. Sometimes it becomes more clear than just using one. Regardless of what that other translation would be.

Other times not. Mostly they all say the same thing.