I guess what I was getting at was have you read the books of the bible chronologically or, in the order that they were written. We know that Job is the oldest book in the Old Testament and in the New Testament Sauls letters pre date the gospels. I've heard that it puts a little different perspective reading them in this way . I have not done so. Like most people I've started at Genesis and read all 66 books in the order that they are layed out in the Bible. I was just curious if you had.
God Almighty terminated the wrong-doers
- Thread starter selfsame
- Start date
Like a novel, sure, that is how most people read it the first time. When you start looking up phrases then you are switching back and forth between book and singling out a specific passage. One flaw with your suggestion is the 12 Books listed after Daniel were all written before Daniel. It works out for the better as Daniel leaves off just when the Messiah is taking Kingship of the earth as the vision in Da:2 predicts. Any reference in those 12 books prophecies that uses the term 'that day' as being the day that Revelations calls the day the 7th trump sounds. From all those references a clear picture of what is going on emerges.
How do you know that? The Gospels could have been written in the 40 days Jesus was back or anytime until Saul/Paul went preaching into the Nations. A copy of them was made at every stop he made. Saul would have been reading the Gospel of Luke and said the Lord's Prayer as he read and that is part of the 'latter days' as it was the beginning of events associated with bruise to the serpents head and that kicked in the De:4:30 prophecy about sincere prayer bring protection. Saul did not have the same future in store as Paul has. That also starts to show there are too many of those obscure connections for the Bible to be a 'random set of writings'.
One of several that exist, my version of using the first and last three chapters as the opening exercise as it explains who God is is where we came from and where we are going. All the rest of the large book is entirely about Ge:3:15 and the prophecy and fulfillment of those two bruises. When Jesus said, 'It is finished', He was referencing all things to do with the bruise to the heel. When He says,'It is done', as he pours out the last vial He is referencing the bruise to the serpent's head. When you come across a prophetic passage it is pretty easy to determine which bruise it is a sequence in.
If that method allowed you fully explain such chapters as Isaiah:65 then I would say that method doesn't need any improvements. If I was to say Ge:2 is more about how the new earth starts that being an improvement of what Ge:1 covers then it is going to need some explaining as you would never consider it as being like that.
How do you know that? The Gospels could have been written in the 40 days Jesus was back or anytime until Saul/Paul went preaching into the Nations. A copy of them was made at every stop he made. Saul would have been reading the Gospel of Luke and said the Lord's Prayer as he read and that is part of the 'latter days' as it was the beginning of events associated with bruise to the serpents head and that kicked in the De:4:30 prophecy about sincere prayer bring protection. Saul did not have the same future in store as Paul has. That also starts to show there are too many of those obscure connections for the Bible to be a 'random set of writings'.
The four canonical Gospels are known to have been written at the end of the first century. The 13 books or "epistles" of Saul/Paul were written from 52 AD to 67 AD. This is pretty much common knowledge.
The four canonical Gospels are known to have been written at the end of the first century. The 13 books or "epistles" of Saul/Paul were written from 52 AD to 67 AD. This is pretty much common knowledge.
Last edited:
The gift of languages was in Acts:2 and that is the only other obstacle to the Gospels being written in flawless Greek by some 'unschooled Jews'. Luke:21:12-24 is a prophecy about the Apostles from the time Stephen is killed until the scattering in 70AD so why have it published long after the 70AD event was already history? That scattering is the one mentioned in De:4:30 and it is past tense in the verse below. James is shown to be one of the later books so many Epistles were already in circulation when it was written.
Jas:1:1:
James,
a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,
to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad,
greeting.
Common knowledge?? By the same men who don't know the Gospel of John is a reference to John the Baptist or that the Beloved Disciple is a woman?
I once worked with a newly converted Jehovah"s Witness fellow years ago. Early eighties as I recall. His new found interest in the bible not only caused him to place himself on a higher level morally than everyone else around him, but also he became in a matter of a few months more knowledgeable than people who had studied the scriptures and theology all of their lives. He once told me, "we who are in the "truth' learn more in one month, than a priest learns in 50 years of study " In matters of religion especially the historicity of it, all any of us really have is peer reviewed writings and opinions. Even Josephus who was a favorite to quote was found to be lacking in accuracy. All we have is hearsay. My co worker became a self appointed scholar because religion can and often does pull people from reality, to the world of self delusion. He knew it all above anyone else regardless of the fact that his time studying the matter was but a fleeting moment compared to those who devoted decades upon decades researching it. It is commonly known as willful ignorance. A refusal to acknowledge established information because that information does not comply with personal dogma and made up fairy tales. ...This is why I like the legend of Socrates . Socrates taught that until we come to the realization that we do not "know" anything, we will never grow as a person. We do not know anything, we only think we do. That is why in matter of religion, all you have is "faith". Nothing more. And isn't that the way it's suppose to be? My advise to you would be to study more, preach less and have a little more regard for those who have forgotten more than you think you know.
Selfsame, what if your Quran is wrong? I mean, Muhammad
was illiterate, right? The Quran was written after he was already
dead, by others trying to recall the words he had spoken, with
their own personal interpretations and spin. What if what is
written isn't what Muhammad had said? What if Muhammad
really wasn't a phophet, but just another madman?
Wouldn't that leave you condemning yourself in your God's
eyes to whatever punishment is fitting for preaching words
false to your God's values? This is just a series of hypothetical
questions....
was illiterate, right? The Quran was written after he was already
dead, by others trying to recall the words he had spoken, with
their own personal interpretations and spin. What if what is
written isn't what Muhammad had said? What if Muhammad
really wasn't a phophet, but just another madman?
Wouldn't that leave you condemning yourself in your God's
eyes to whatever punishment is fitting for preaching words
false to your God's values? This is just a series of hypothetical
questions....
Same thing with Jesus. the man did not write one word. All we have is the opinion of a self appointed apostle who loved to write letters and unknown sources who wrote things they thought he said almost a hundred years after his death.
Sorry I butted in just kinda saw that and it reminded me of the other religions similarity in that regard.
Try not to disguise you witch hunts as anything but what they are in the future. There are several reasons for this other than it makes you look stupid to think it would work in the first place,.
We could start there and by the time that was fully explored you would be out of arguments that supported the Apostle John as having written one word of the Gospel of John or Revelations. Today, right now you couldn't even identify who wrote the 3 Epistles of John so I'm not sure why you would champion your lack of knowledge as being a sign of how great you are compared to me in terms of what the Bible promotes and what it doesn't promote.
The 4 Gospels are 4 parts to one single Gospel and it takes all 4 before you have the complete 'story'. You, and you lack luster experts can't even identify who wrote which part even though are given clues as big as a barn door. There are two events that 3 Apostles witnessed and they are mentioned in the 3 Gospels other than John, a simple deduction would attribute those 3 as being written by the eye-witnesses. Peter wrote Matthew based on the family history which Peter would have picked up on during the wedding mentioned in the Gospel of John and the other two were written by John and James, the two brothers as they were the other two that recorded what happened during the two events those 3 were witnesses to.
Ready to continue when you catch up.
Joh:21:24:
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,
and wrote these things:
and we know that his testimony is true.
Here is part of a letter from Peter to the Beloved Disciple, now you find the alternative promotions and I'll show you the flaws in their thinking.
1Jo:1:1-3:
That which was from the beginning,
which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled,
of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
and we have seen it,
and bear witness,
and shew unto you that eternal life,
which was with the Father,
and was manifested unto us
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
that ye also may have fellowship with us:
and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with his Son Jesus Christ.
If you had a leg to stand on you would be able to challenge what i promote the book as saying, you don't, yet you want that to be taken as a sign of how much more intelligent you are about the book (and in general) than I am. So far all you have are swings and misses.
What good is it to be your own witness? If you do certain events and 4 others write about it would those 4 versions have more validity that a version you alone wrote? (a simple question with an obvious answer so it will get ignored by you because it alone wrecks you version)
People who learn from other people who are in error pick up the same mistakes so as far as studying and learning none of them have made any improvements over what their 'teachers' have been taught. If 'your experts' are such experts why is Revelations attributed to the Apostle John rather than John the Baptist and a Disciple of his? You can (and will) run your mouth off endlessly about what you think you know (based on what others have written) and claim you have 'the truth' when you cannot answer all the questions that dispute your core beliefs that the teachings you have accepted are those of learned men rather than men who toed the line an accepted what was being promoted as the truth and no independent thinking was allowed.
We could start there and by the time that was fully explored you would be out of arguments that supported the Apostle John as having written one word of the Gospel of John or Revelations. Today, right now you couldn't even identify who wrote the 3 Epistles of John so I'm not sure why you would champion your lack of knowledge as being a sign of how great you are compared to me in terms of what the Bible promotes and what it doesn't promote.
The 4 Gospels are 4 parts to one single Gospel and it takes all 4 before you have the complete 'story'. You, and you lack luster experts can't even identify who wrote which part even though are given clues as big as a barn door. There are two events that 3 Apostles witnessed and they are mentioned in the 3 Gospels other than John, a simple deduction would attribute those 3 as being written by the eye-witnesses. Peter wrote Matthew based on the family history which Peter would have picked up on during the wedding mentioned in the Gospel of John and the other two were written by John and James, the two brothers as they were the other two that recorded what happened during the two events those 3 were witnesses to.
Ready to continue when you catch up.
When you are taught by people who are in error you pick up those same errors and pass them on as the truth. When you challenge existing teachings and come up with 'plausible answers' then you have learned something new. I gave you a few examples above and there are more but why bother with them when the first few are enough to stump you and the experts you have chosen to be the ones holding the facts. (such as the 4 writers were not eyewitnesses even with the constant use of the word 'truth' you just make it 'lie' without any justification)
Joh:21:24:
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,
and wrote these things:
and we know that his testimony is true.
Here is part of a letter from Peter to the Beloved Disciple, now you find the alternative promotions and I'll show you the flaws in their thinking.
1Jo:1:1-3:
That which was from the beginning,
which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled,
of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
and we have seen it,
and bear witness,
and shew unto you that eternal life,
which was with the Father,
and was manifested unto us
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
that ye also may have fellowship with us:
and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with his Son Jesus Christ.
Your hearsay you mean, you need all 4 Gospels to be able to tell what happened at the cross and at the tomb before that picture is clear. As it stand you don't have a clue even with you fake experts. Prove me wrong if you can, we both know you can't so that hardly makes you any sort of authority on the subject, despite you own wishes.
Doesn't that describe you rather than me as you are challenging my words rather than me challenging your words because you actually have not said anything to date other than 'your experts'
So now 25 years of my time is now 'fleeting' is it? They didn't research anything, they took to heart everything they were told, do you raelly think the RCC allows questioning of 'their version' or that Rabbis today can challenge the Jews who go by the work of the ancient scholars who determined what the OT meant before the Bible was even fully written. John the Baptist was equal to all the OT Prophets but the Gospel of John and Revelations are not considered when teaching what they taught. That is what sloppy research looks like.
You call them tales because you do not understand the format of the book, try not to pass your short comings off as making you the resident expert on the Bible. Rather than flapping your gums you be be quietly reading the book on your own.
You can't reference anything in the book at all so this speaks of you alone, not something you should e entirely proud of considering you claim to have a better understanding of the book than a reader of 25 years has.
It's actually called 'belief' because you believe that the writers are who they say they are, eye-witnesses to the events they wrote about.
Fuk you, that plain enough for you?
If you had a leg to stand on you would be able to challenge what i promote the book as saying, you don't, yet you want that to be taken as a sign of how much more intelligent you are about the book (and in general) than I am. So far all you have are swings and misses.
Add another question, what would happen to your argument if the Quran ended up being what Jesus taught to the village that the woman from the well came from?
Come on now tell the truth, you are quite happy to ride somebodies coat-tails because you are having some difficulty forming an effective argument about the generalities let alone the specifics of the material the Bible covers.
What good is it to be your own witness? If you do certain events and 4 others write about it would those 4 versions have more validity that a version you alone wrote? (a simple question with an obvious answer so it will get ignored by you because it alone wrecks you version)
I rest my case. Everything you post is about one thing, and one thing only,, you and your exhausting attempt to redeem "your" esteem, and prove "your " vast knowledge which,,quite frankly is a drop in the bucket. you're a sad , mentally ill little man that needs help. The first step is acknowledging that fact", which I'm not sure you'll ever do. Why? Because that would cause you to shed your costume and be the real you which you obviously are not proud of. Like Bones says,, and nothing need be added at this point. Take your meds.Try not to disguise you witch hunts as anything but what they are in the future. There are several reasons for this other than it makes you look stupid to think it would work in the first place,.
People who learn from other people who are in error pick up the same mistakes so as far as studying and learning none of them have made any improvements over what their 'teachers' have been taught. If 'your experts' are such experts why is Revelations attributed to the Apostle John rather than John the Baptist and a Disciple of his? You can (and will) run your mouth off endlessly about what you think you know (based on what others have written) and claim you have 'the truth' when you cannot answer all the questions that dispute your core beliefs that the teachings you have accepted are those of learned men rather than men who toed the line an accepted what was being promoted as the truth and no independent thinking was allowed.
We could start there and by the time that was fully explored you would be out of arguments that supported the Apostle John as having written one word of the Gospel of John or Revelations. Today, right now you couldn't even identify who wrote the 3 Epistles of John so I'm not sure why you would champion your lack of knowledge as being a sign of how great you are compared to me in terms of what the Bible promotes and what it doesn't promote.
The 4 Gospels are 4 parts to one single Gospel and it takes all 4 before you have the complete 'story'. You, and you lack luster experts can't even identify who wrote which part even though are given clues as big as a barn door. There are two events that 3 Apostles witnessed and they are mentioned in the 3 Gospels other than John, a simple deduction would attribute those 3 as being written by the eye-witnesses. Peter wrote Matthew based on the family history which Peter would have picked up on during the wedding mentioned in the Gospel of John and the other two were written by John and James, the two brothers as they were the other two that recorded what happened during the two events those 3 were witnesses to.
Ready to continue when you catch up.
When you are taught by people who are in error you pick up those same errors and pass them on as the truth. When you challenge existing teachings and come up with 'plausible answers' then you have learned something new. I gave you a few examples above and there are more but why bother with them when the first few are enough to stump you and the experts you have chosen to be the ones holding the facts. (such as the 4 writers were not eyewitnesses even with the constant use of the word 'truth' you just make it 'lie' without any justification)
Joh:21:24:
This is the disciple which testifieth of these things,
and wrote these things:
and we know that his testimony is true.
Here is part of a letter from Peter to the Beloved Disciple, now you find the alternative promotions and I'll show you the flaws in their thinking.
1Jo:1:1-3:
That which was from the beginning,
which we have heard,
which we have seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon,
and our hands have handled,
of the Word of life;
(For the life was manifested,
and we have seen it,
and bear witness,
and shew unto you that eternal life,
which was with the Father,
and was manifested unto us
That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,
that ye also may have fellowship with us:
and truly our fellowship is with the Father,
and with his Son Jesus Christ.
Your hearsay you mean, you need all 4 Gospels to be able to tell what happened at the cross and at the tomb before that picture is clear. As it stand you don't have a clue even with you fake experts. Prove me wrong if you can, we both know you can't so that hardly makes you any sort of authority on the subject, despite you own wishes.
Doesn't that describe you rather than me as you are challenging my words rather than me challenging your words because you actually have not said anything to date other than 'your experts'
So now 25 years of my time is now 'fleeting' is it? They didn't research anything, they took to heart everything they were told, do you raelly think the RCC allows questioning of 'their version' or that Rabbis today can challenge the Jews who go by the work of the ancient scholars who determined what the OT meant before the Bible was even fully written. John the Baptist was equal to all the OT Prophets but the Gospel of John and Revelations are not considered when teaching what they taught. That is what sloppy research looks like.
You call them tales because you do not understand the format of the book, try not to pass your short comings off as making you the resident expert on the Bible. Rather than flapping your gums you be be quietly reading the book on your own.
You can't reference anything in the book at all so this speaks of you alone, not something you should e entirely proud of considering you claim to have a better understanding of the book than a reader of 25 years has.
It's actually called 'belief' because you believe that the writers are who they say they are, eye-witnesses to the events they wrote about.
Fuk you, that plain enough for you?
If you had a leg to stand on you would be able to challenge what i promote the book as saying, you don't, yet you want that to be taken as a sign of how much more intelligent you are about the book (and in general) than I am. So far all you have are swings and misses.
Add another question, what would happen to your argument if the Quran ended up being what Jesus taught to the village that the woman from the well came from?
Come on now tell the truth, you are quite happy to ride somebodies coat-tails because you are having some difficulty forming an effective argument about the generalities let alone the specifics of the material the Bible covers.
What good is it to be your own witness? If you do certain events and 4 others write about it would those 4 versions have more validity that a version you alone wrote? (a simple question with an obvious answer so it will get ignored by you because it alone wrecks you version)
You never had a case and you showed it by not having one though on any of the points I mentioned, the biggest being how your knowledge trumps somebody who has studied the book for 25 years and will be doing so for another 25. One of us is stuck there is no doubt about that but you are the ones lacking answers rather than it being me. I don't feel at all threatened by your lack of knowledge, I think you should know that.
If Mohammed is not a prophet, who then is a prophet?
Prophet Mohammed invited people to God alone, and to devote themselves solely to God alone without associate, peer, patron or son or daughter .. God is the Eternal, the Alive forever Who dies not, the Almighty and the Most Gracious.
This is the best proof indicating his truthfulness: his preaching to God alone as it is in the Commandment which is the most important of all the commandments: the First Commandment: that God is One without associate and that He alone should be worshiped and no one else.
About the Quran: it was written in the life time of Mohammed who ordered the Muslims to write every revelation, and he commanded that his own words: the hadiths should not be written lest it might be mixed and confused with the Quran; but the Quran was collected following his death, in the time of the third Caliph: Othman.
Moreover, the Quran is known by heart, like you know a poem by heart. So the Quran was known by heart by many of the companions of the prophet and by others.
Another point: you said he might be a madman .. so will the madman leave behind a religion pertaining to God and leave a most logical teachings and wisdom.
The admonition in the Quran The Conflict between the Torah and the Quran Google search.
The Disagreement of the
"God – be glorified – said in the Quran 17: 22-39, which mean:
{>> [O man] set not up with God another god, or you will sit condemned and forsaken.
>> [O Mohammed] your Lord decreed, that you [people] must worship none save Him, and [that you must show] kindness to parents; when one or both of them attain old age in your [home, O man]; then do not say to them any word of boredom, nor chide them, but speak to them respectful words.
>> And lower to them the wing of humility out of compassion, and say: "My Lord, bestow on them Your mercy even as they cherished me in childhood."
>> Your Lord knows best that [you hide] within yourselves if you are righteous, then [surely] He is Ever Forgiving for those who always revert.
>> And render to the kindred their due rights, as [also] to the needy, and to the wayfarer; but squander not [your wealth] in the manner of a spendthrift.
Surely, spendthrifts are brothers of devils, and the devil was ungrateful to his Lord.
>> And in case you turn away from them, seeking for a mercy that you hope of your Lord, then speak to them a reasonable word.
>> And let not your hand be bound to your neck nor open it so widely, lest you come to be blamed and denuded.
[O Mohammed] surely, your Lord gives provision in abundance to those of His servants whom He will, or He doles it out. Surely, He is All-Aware and All-Seeing of His servants.
>> And slay not your children for fear of penury; We will provide for them and for you, surely; to slay them is ever a great sin.
>> And approach not [women for] adultery; for it is ever an indecent [deed] and an evil [way.]
>> And kill not the soul which God has forbidden save by a right [cause]. Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power to his heir, but let him not commit excess in slaying; surely, he will be helped to overcome.
>> Approach not the wealth of the orphan save in that which is best, till he reach puberty, and fulfill the covenant; surely the covenant is ever inquired of.
>> Give full measure in case you measure out, and weigh with the standard weight; that is better and fairer in practice.
>> And do not go after that about which you [man] have no knowledge; for the hearing, the sight and the [spiritual] heart, of all these it shall be inquired.
>> And walk not upon the earth exultantly; certainly you [man] will never tear the earth open, nor attain the mountains in height.
All this is ever evil and abhorred in the sight of your Lord.
That is [some] of the wisdom your Lord has revealed to you [O Mohammed]; set not up another god with God, or you will be cast into Hell, dispraised and driven away.}
Last edited:
I like it when you admit you lie.
Yet you lie and don't have me on ignore so you can read what I say.
Yes, I know you admire me. Thank you.
Carry on lying and being a whiny hypocrite. You're very entertaining.
Probably the best thing to do at this point, instead of trying to shift the focus off of your deceptive nature and on to another , is to stop being so mindful of what others think of you. It's the internet. Doesn't matter if people observed your lying ways. Who cares. You're now a known poser . A dime a dozen. Doesn't affect your life at all apart from your façade on here so,try and recover and maybe your friends will overlook your lying a$$. You pathetic excuse for a slug. LOL.
That was for my friend Sal . A lady with twenty times the character and integrity that you possess poser.
Now,,on to better things which most anything is.
That was for my friend Sal . A lady with twenty times the character and integrity that you possess poser.
Now,,on to better things which most anything is.
I don't care what others think of me, anyone with 4 brain cells can see that.
Your hypocrisy is as hilarious as your lies.
Sal, as flakey and dishonest as you.
Sure sure, see you again soon.
Sorry, you know who. He keeps begging real hard for my attention.
