Originally posted by Oxidadoblancoquepasa
Could you please explain how it is that you came to take the writings of the bible so literally?
Lots of study, memorising verses while young, a burning desire to disprove other religions?
The Bible, (King James 1611 Bible), is a letter to You, inspired by GOD through his servants with a clear and direct message for You.
With that said, I acknowledge there are also flaws with this Letter, albeit due to man. These flaws are found within the Transliteration, which
carried more Dogma, Doctrine and Theology of man, and missed the opportunity to simply Translated the Letter, as the Original Texts intended.
Take the confusing aspect of some suggesting this Planet is Ancient, and apply it to those whom opt to think it is only some 6000 years old. This is
steming from the applied Term "DAY", and presumed implications that we generally associate to that term. We see it today as a period of time and
generally affix 24 hours to be it's intended meaning.
When we look to the actual word used in the Book of Moses, we find this isn't quite that "Fixed", so to speak
yowm yome from an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the
next), or figurative (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverb):--age, + always, + chronicals, continually(-ance), daily,
((birth-), each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever(-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (...
live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at
other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year(-ly), + younger.
As shown, Yown has many implied applications.
Please take my little test and report your findings. Your writing is very thorough and you are so very well spoken it would enlighten me.
When you quote from the bible, have you ever asked yourself this:
1. Who was there?
2. Who saw it?
3. Who wrote it down?
A modern day court of law won't let you even testify if you can't answer these questions in regard to a case.
And the courts are becoming more ATS monded everyday..."Pics or it didn't happen"....lol
Thanks in advance,
Strange, you make this query, yet that same court of law is based upon Biblical Tenets and when testifying in those courts, one still swears to tell
the truth upon the Bible. Strange isn't it?????
Most of the Books of Moses, are writings that in all likelihood, where written years after Moses Died/Was Taken.
They are based upon the Oral Histories of the 12 Tribes, which as note earlier, are coming from a Mesopotamian Origin through Abraham.
I place these writings as being quite accurate in many aspects, YET, I also see the same History presented in other cultures of the Ancient Past. Same
events, Different perspective. We must remember, the "gods" had one aim. Self Glorification. The story is the same, and the name get changed to
reflect the view point of the specific god, or as the case may be, goddess.
Not too many would have "SEEN" the events expressed in the Books of Moses. (1 Possibility could be Enoch, since there is no indication death came to
him.) As for the balance, that would be subjective based on the individual book being addressed.
As for the scribes of these books, this is the Divine Inspiration of GOD through the Instrument being used.
The story presented is expressed and recorded as Inspired.
But when we tend to see this in a more modern outlook, they are collectively bound within one text. referred to as the Bible.
This does nothing to note the colorful past of curious individuals which had a hand in "Crafting" what Scripts where found to be acceptable. Here,
Dogma, Theology, and Doctrine seep into the picture and taint it with the a skew perspective of man apposed to what GOD intended.
Take this through to 1611 when a Mason has some Irish Scribes translate and construct the King James 1611 Bible.
Is an Irish Scribe going to argue against the Church of the Day? I think not. What the "Church" wished to have presented prior to the Translation,
would carry through in the written account. Concepts non biblical are introduced.
Thankfully we have the Original Texts we can review and see these intentional premises being introduced.
I hope that covers your query.
Have a good evening