I doubt YOUR smart enough to understand most of your thoughts. I don't buy the "look how smart I am" crap that you put out. As a matter of fact, your "interpretations" of the Bible show quite plainly how limited your intellect really is.
A challenge to our dear Christian friends.
- Thread starter mrgrumpy
- Start date
I doubt YOUR smart enough to understand most of your thoughts. I don't buy the "look how smart I am" crap that you put out. As a matter of fact, your "interpretations" of the Bible show quite plainly how limited your intellect really is.
Maybe so, but it's miles ahead of yours. Religious belief isn't a matter of intellect anyway. And that's as far as I'm going to go in swapping insults with you. Not worth the effort, and it's irrelevant to the discussion.
You could be smart too if you stopped using "faith" as an argument. Intelligence comes from how you think not by way of what you think.
To quote Frank Herbert "Fear is the mind killer."
Don't be afraid. Prove your point. I mean, if your right, there should be plenty of evidence? Maybe some evidence? Any evidence? Something? Anything at all!?!
There is no"discussion" here. There hasn't been from the begining of the thread. There hasn't been in quite a few "Christian" threads. You and your fellow "athiests" are not interested in "discussing" Christianity. You are only interested in putting it down and demeaning those that believe in Christ.
So Dexter...... get off your f*cking holier than thou high horse.
So Dexter...... get off your f*cking holier than thou high horse.
On this last sentence, I would agree with you completely. My problem with religion in general (ok, one of my problems) is that it teaches some people are better than others. "If you believe what I say and do what I tell you, you get to go to heaven. That guy over there doesn't.".... Believers will say that one person getting salvation doesn't mean God loves the sinner who is damned to hell any less, but if God could love someone and damn them anyways then I'd hate to imagine what he'd do to people he doesn't like.
Question: If the OT rules no longer really apply then why are people still making such a big deal about homosexuality? Wasn't the admonishment against that in the OT? Why does it still hold, but we don't preach stoning people for working on the sabbath anymore?
There are few things more amusing tha Christian apologists trying to excuse or interpret Scripture. They say it has to be put into "context", it has to be "discerned", it's subject to "interpretation".
The words are as clear as the nose on their face but they have to make excuses for the shameful, murderous and evil texts written by their God.
Here's one ;
"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obeynhis father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to his elders at the gates of the town. They shall say to their elders our son is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profilgate and a drunkard. Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death." Deuteronomy 21 18-21
There are hundreds more.Even a child can understand their meaning.
But of course God IS evil. He even admits it.
The words are as clear as the nose on their face but they have to make excuses for the shameful, murderous and evil texts written by their God.
Here's one ;
"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obeynhis father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to his elders at the gates of the town. They shall say to their elders our son is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profilgate and a drunkard. Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death." Deuteronomy 21 18-21
There are hundreds more.Even a child can understand their meaning.
But of course God IS evil. He even admits it.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The oldest extant texts of the Old Testament in Hebrew are those found at Qumran which date only to (by some estimates) two or three centuries before Christ. The oldest version before those were discovered was a Greek translation from about the same period! The earliest complete Hebrew text dates only from the tenth century AD! Something is wrong with this picture.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is generally believed from textual analysis, that a very small part of the Old Testament was written about 1000 BC and the remainder about 600 BC. The Bible, as we know it, is the result of many changes throughout centuries and is contradictory in so many ways we don’t have space to catalog them all! There are entire libraries of books devoted to this subject, and I recommend that the reader have a look at the material in order to have some foundation upon which to judge the things I am going to say.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Biblical scholars generally date Abraham to about 1800 - 1700 BC. The same scholars date Moses to 1300 or 1250 BC. However, if we track the generations as listed in the Bible, we find that there are only seven generations between and including these two patriarchal figures! Four hundred years is a bit long for seven generations. Allowing 35 to 40 years per generation, places Abraham at about 1550 BC and Moses at about 1300 BC. This obviously means that there are a few hundred years not accounted for in the text. Tracking back to Noah, using the generations listed in the Bible, one arrives at a date of about 2000 to 1900 BC - about the time of the arrival of the Indo-Europeans into the Near East. The geological and archaeological records do not support a cataclysm at that time, though what could be described as a global discontinuity of cataclysmic elements is supported right around 12,000 years ago. In this case, we have lost 8,000 years, give or take a day.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In a more general sense, using the Bible as historical source material presents a number of very serious problems, most particularly when we consider the “mythicization” factor. There are many contradictions in the text that cannot be reconciled by standard theological mental contortionism. In some places, events are described as happening in a certain order, and later the Bible will say that those events happened in a different order. In one place, the Bible will say that there is two of something, and in another it will say that there were 14 of the same thing. On one page, the Bible will say that the Moabites did something, and then a few pages later; it will say that the Midianites did exactly the same thing. There is even an instance in which Moses is described as going to the Tabernacle before Moses built the Tabernacle! (I guess Moses was a time traveler!)[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]There are things in the Pentateuch that pose other problems: it includes things that Moses could not have known if he lived when he is claimed to have lived. And, there is one case in which Moses said something he could not have said: the text gives an account of Moses’ death, which it is hardly likely that Moses described. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]All of these problems were taken care of for most of the past two thousand years by the Inquisition, which also took care of the Cathars and anybody else who did not follow the Party Line of Judao-Christianity.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]For the Jews, the contradictions were not contradictions; they were only “apparent contradictions!” They could all be explained by “interpretation!” (Usually, these interpretations were more fantastic than the problems, I might add.) Moses was able to “know things he couldn’t have known” because he was a prophet! The medieval biblical commentators, such as Rashi and Nachmanides, were VERY skillful in reconciling the irreconcilable![/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the 11th century, a real troublemaker, Isaac ibn Yashush, a Jewish court physician in Muslim Spain, mentioned the distressing fact that a list of Edomite kings that appears in Genesis 36 named a few kings who lived long after Moses was already dead. Ibn Yashush suggested the obvious, that someone who lived after Moses wrote the list. He became known as “Isaac the Blunderer.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]T[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The guy who memorialized clever Isaac this way was a fellow named Abraham ibn Ezra, a 12th century rabbi in Spain. But Ibn Ezra presents us with a paradox because he also wrote about problems in the text of the Torah. He alluded to several passages that appeared not to be from Moses’ own hand because they referred to Moses in the third person, used terms Moses would not have known, described places that Moses had never been, and used language that belonged to an altogether different time and place than the milieu of Moses. He wrote, very mysteriously, “And if you understand, then you will recognize the truth. And he who understands will keep silent.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So, why did he call Ibn Yashush a “Blunderer?” Obviously because the guy had to open his big mouth and give away the secret that the Torah was not what it was cracked up to be, and if the truth got out, lots of folks who were totally “into” the Jewish mysticism business would lose interest. And keeping the interest of the students and seekers after power was a pretty big business in that day and time. More than that, however, we would like to note that the entire Christian mythos was predicated upon the validity of Judaism, being its “New Covenant”, and even if there was apparent conflict between Jews and Christians, the Christians most desperately needed to validate Judaism and its claim to be the revelation to the “chosen people” of the One True God. It was on that basis that Jesus was the Son of God, after all. In short, it could even be said that Christianity created Judaism in the sense that it would have faded to obscurity long ago if there had not been the infusion of validating energy during the Dark Ages.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In[/FONT]http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho1.htm
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It is generally believed from textual analysis, that a very small part of the Old Testament was written about 1000 BC and the remainder about 600 BC. The Bible, as we know it, is the result of many changes throughout centuries and is contradictory in so many ways we don’t have space to catalog them all! There are entire libraries of books devoted to this subject, and I recommend that the reader have a look at the material in order to have some foundation upon which to judge the things I am going to say.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Biblical scholars generally date Abraham to about 1800 - 1700 BC. The same scholars date Moses to 1300 or 1250 BC. However, if we track the generations as listed in the Bible, we find that there are only seven generations between and including these two patriarchal figures! Four hundred years is a bit long for seven generations. Allowing 35 to 40 years per generation, places Abraham at about 1550 BC and Moses at about 1300 BC. This obviously means that there are a few hundred years not accounted for in the text. Tracking back to Noah, using the generations listed in the Bible, one arrives at a date of about 2000 to 1900 BC - about the time of the arrival of the Indo-Europeans into the Near East. The geological and archaeological records do not support a cataclysm at that time, though what could be described as a global discontinuity of cataclysmic elements is supported right around 12,000 years ago. In this case, we have lost 8,000 years, give or take a day.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In a more general sense, using the Bible as historical source material presents a number of very serious problems, most particularly when we consider the “mythicization” factor. There are many contradictions in the text that cannot be reconciled by standard theological mental contortionism. In some places, events are described as happening in a certain order, and later the Bible will say that those events happened in a different order. In one place, the Bible will say that there is two of something, and in another it will say that there were 14 of the same thing. On one page, the Bible will say that the Moabites did something, and then a few pages later; it will say that the Midianites did exactly the same thing. There is even an instance in which Moses is described as going to the Tabernacle before Moses built the Tabernacle! (I guess Moses was a time traveler!)[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]There are things in the Pentateuch that pose other problems: it includes things that Moses could not have known if he lived when he is claimed to have lived. And, there is one case in which Moses said something he could not have said: the text gives an account of Moses’ death, which it is hardly likely that Moses described. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]All of these problems were taken care of for most of the past two thousand years by the Inquisition, which also took care of the Cathars and anybody else who did not follow the Party Line of Judao-Christianity.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]For the Jews, the contradictions were not contradictions; they were only “apparent contradictions!” They could all be explained by “interpretation!” (Usually, these interpretations were more fantastic than the problems, I might add.) Moses was able to “know things he couldn’t have known” because he was a prophet! The medieval biblical commentators, such as Rashi and Nachmanides, were VERY skillful in reconciling the irreconcilable![/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the 11th century, a real troublemaker, Isaac ibn Yashush, a Jewish court physician in Muslim Spain, mentioned the distressing fact that a list of Edomite kings that appears in Genesis 36 named a few kings who lived long after Moses was already dead. Ibn Yashush suggested the obvious, that someone who lived after Moses wrote the list. He became known as “Isaac the Blunderer.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]T[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The guy who memorialized clever Isaac this way was a fellow named Abraham ibn Ezra, a 12th century rabbi in Spain. But Ibn Ezra presents us with a paradox because he also wrote about problems in the text of the Torah. He alluded to several passages that appeared not to be from Moses’ own hand because they referred to Moses in the third person, used terms Moses would not have known, described places that Moses had never been, and used language that belonged to an altogether different time and place than the milieu of Moses. He wrote, very mysteriously, “And if you understand, then you will recognize the truth. And he who understands will keep silent.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]So, why did he call Ibn Yashush a “Blunderer?” Obviously because the guy had to open his big mouth and give away the secret that the Torah was not what it was cracked up to be, and if the truth got out, lots of folks who were totally “into” the Jewish mysticism business would lose interest. And keeping the interest of the students and seekers after power was a pretty big business in that day and time. More than that, however, we would like to note that the entire Christian mythos was predicated upon the validity of Judaism, being its “New Covenant”, and even if there was apparent conflict between Jews and Christians, the Christians most desperately needed to validate Judaism and its claim to be the revelation to the “chosen people” of the One True God. It was on that basis that Jesus was the Son of God, after all. In short, it could even be said that Christianity created Judaism in the sense that it would have faded to obscurity long ago if there had not been the infusion of validating energy during the Dark Ages.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In[/FONT]http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/biblewho1.htm
I hope this answer doesn't bore or confuse you, but the answer to this is one that is found by referencing a little bit from a lot of different places in Scripture. The answer is we are under the teachings of Jesus. The how and why is the long and complicated (finding all the little tid-bits).
The original 10 commandments (10 Laws) were given exclusively to God's chosen people (Israel). The laws of social behavior were also exclusive to Israel, administered by the priests who could only come from the house of Levi, Aaron was their first priest, he was also a brother to Moses.
The last high-priest (from the tribe of Levi AND anointed by God) was John the Baptist. His father was a priest (Levite)and his mother was a daughter of Aaron. Jesus's lineage through Joseph includes David, heir to the throne (Matthew), His lineage through Mary (Elizabeth's cousin, making her also a daughter of Aaron) goes back to Adam. That is why (as a Son of Man, being born by a flesh and blood mother) Jesus has authority, as a priest in this case, that includes not only all of Israel but also everybody else that was ever born. Any instruction He has given (by Himself before the cross or through the words that were written after the cross has the authority as coming from one who can determine how things are. What He taught was not from Himself, those instructions were given to Him by God.
Joh:8:26:
I have many things to say and to judge of you:
but he that sent me is true;
and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.
Joh:8:27:
They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
Joh:8:28:
Then said Jesus unto them,
When ye have lifted up the Son of man,
then shall ye know that I am he,
and that I do nothing of myself;
but as my Father hath taught me,
I speak these things.
Joh:8:29:
And he that sent me is with me:
the Father hath not left me alone;
for I do always those things that please him.
The change in priest-hood occurred when John was cast into prison, that is when Jesus began to preach (and heal people, etc). The Gospel of John is the only Gospel that covers things that He did before John was cast into prison, other than have His disciples baptize (in the same manner as John did) Jesus was rather 'laid-back'.
When there is a change in priest-hood (in that He was priest over more than just Israel) there also is a change in Law. The 10 original commandments were not changed other than to be made into two Laws. The 1st one being exactly the same as the 1st Law of the 10. The other 9 were changed in that they were no just 1 Law, Love thy Neighbor. Not love thy neighbor who is the same 'faith'. A neighbor to a Gentile is all other Gentiles, plain and simple.
Heb:7:11: If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
Heb:7:12:
For the priesthood being changed,
there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Heb:7:13:
For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe,
of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
Heb:7:14:
For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda;
of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
Heb:7:15:
And it is yet far more evident:
for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,
Heb:7:16:
Who is made,
not after the law of a carnal commandment,
but after the power of an endless life.
With a new priest-hood also comes a new covenant, the one in Hebrews 8 is the covenant that will be 'in effect' only after His second coming, that isn't in place today for either the Gentiles or the Jews. The covenant we are under is this one.
Joh:15:10:
If ye keep my commandments,
ye shall abide in my love;
even as I have kept my Father's commandments,
and abide in his love.
Joh:15:11:
These things have I spoken unto you,
that my joy might remain in you,
and that your joy might be full.
Joh:15:12:
This is my commandment,
That ye love one another,
as I have loved you.
But the old instructions don't apply, your references to Israel entering the promised land (and doing what they were instructed to do) ended when they finally got to their promised land, within those well defined borders. They weren't spreading the Gospel, their intent was to conquer a certain piece of land, which God also took away from them on more than one occasion, the last one still being in effect until Christ's return. If God would exile His people for not doing what He said just what do you think Christ is going to do to those that call Him lord yet do not do the things He has said? It won't be the fiery lake but it will be the closest thing to it that allows for an exit. How many 'Christians' do you think that will include? That will be the first group to be judged.
1Pe:4:15:
But let none of you suffer as a murderer,
or as a thief,
or as an evildoer,
or as a busybody in other men's matters.
1Pe:4:16:
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian,
let him not be ashamed;
but let him glorify God on this behalf.
1Pe:4:17:
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God:
and if it first begin at us,
what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
1Pe:4:18:
And if the righteous scarcely be saved,
where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
1Pe:4:19:
Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing,
as unto a faithful Creator.
Certainly people do that, God also put in measures that curtail that sort of practice. Any subject that is covered in Scripture is spoken of in more than one place, three or more is more usual than not. The neat thing about that is each separate reference adds just a tad-bit more information on that one topic but they usually also reference another 'similar topic'. For instance a few verses from the OT about prayer also hold a reference to 'how useful' prayer will be in that last few years before His return.
De:4:29:
But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God,
thou shalt find him,
if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.
De:4:30:
When thou art in tribulation,
and all these things are come upon thee,
even in the latter days,
if thou turn to the LORD thy God,
and shalt be obedient unto his voice;
De:4:31:
(For the LORD thy God is a merciful God
he will not forsake thee,
neither destroy thee,
nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.
You are right, it is complex in that the information is scattered about in all the text, the only hard part is finding all the relevant words, once you have 'most' (in that you might still be missing a few references) the understanding of what those words mean is quite easy to understand.
Isa:28:9:
Whom shall he teach knowledge?
and whom shall he make to understand doctrine?
them that are weaned from the milk,
and drawn from the breasts.
Isa:28:10:
For precept must be upon precept,
precept upon precept;
line upon line,
line upon line;
here a little,
and there a little:
When I find something that 'seems' inconsistent it's a reason to do some more reading, assuming that it is my understanding that is in error and not His written word. Sooner or later I can usually find more info on the subject in question. A few quick examples, in Ezekiel 39 it says all Israel will die by the sword by the time the feast for the beasts of the field is 'ready'. Zechariah points to 1/3 of a group not dieing at His return. This is either a conflict of facts or it is simple referencing two different groups, Israel and Gentiles.
Another example is who is the rider in the vision that goes with the 1st seal. Most relate it to the last anti-christ, given authority to start the tribulation associated with Satan. They can't come up with any reference from Scripture that explains the bow he carries, they just kind of ignore that little part or point out that it is only a bow that is mentioned but no arrows are mentioned so there is a 'lack of real power'. If you take this Scripture into account does it a) add information b)identify the roder.
Isa:49:2:
And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword;
in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me,
and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;
That would certainly change who the rider was from being the anti-christ to it being God and the white horse being the Holy Spirit? That isn't inconsistent with other passages that says the end of times starts when God alone determines it actually starts. (Scripture does give a sequence of events and a time-line that precedes Christ's actual return).
Later
The gift, if you will is that we have the right to choose.
That right came with a price, first on our account, second on God's account.
The latter extinguished the former, thereby, giving us complete freedom from eternal annihilation.
So, choose what you want to believe, for it is a "covered gift" as a love gift from God.
Now, how you choose, how you live does have consequences.
If you don't believe in God at all, but you live a just life, do right to your neighbor, have a passion for good, then rewards from the unbelievable God flow your way.
The believer has more to contend with, or say a more severe penalty to pay in that claims of godliness must be lived.
For it says: "For much is given, much is required".
So, ...."judge not that ye may not be judged".....goes for believer and unbeliever alike.
If God loves you and tell me to love, then I want to love as He loves.
I don't have too............but I want to.
Peace>>>AJ
That right came with a price, first on our account, second on God's account.
The latter extinguished the former, thereby, giving us complete freedom from eternal annihilation.
So, choose what you want to believe, for it is a "covered gift" as a love gift from God.
Now, how you choose, how you live does have consequences.
If you don't believe in God at all, but you live a just life, do right to your neighbor, have a passion for good, then rewards from the unbelievable God flow your way.
The believer has more to contend with, or say a more severe penalty to pay in that claims of godliness must be lived.
For it says: "For much is given, much is required".
So, ...."judge not that ye may not be judged".....goes for believer and unbeliever alike.
If God loves you and tell me to love, then I want to love as He loves.
I don't have too............but I want to.
Peace>>>AJ
Gerry why don't you just go play with your little friends and leave the big people to discuss impotent stuff beyond your fixed parrameters. My itty bitty brain gets a lot of pleasure out of your support for the atheists point of view, in that respect you are exibit "A". :lol:
I have said that I'm not a religious man but I will respect those who are. The many stupid wars that have been fought over religion are among the reasons why I'm not religious. I have known lots of very good people who were religious and my parents.were among them. Using a shotgun to insult everyone doesn't help your argument.
Good and very informative post.
I would like to enlighten you on the verse above so as to give reason to the wordings and as seemed contradictions in the bible.
Israel had a relationship with God such as a first born child over the Gentile world.
But in order for God to save the world, He had to take the birthright away from Israel, or in using words to mean the same thing "all Israel will die by the sword", meaning that Israel no longer holds the first born status but Christ.
There is another term which is described like this to mean the same thing, ....Cut off the head and the tail.....meaning that Jesus cut Israel off, and Israel cut Jesus off.
All for a purpose and that was to make for an all inclusive condition of salvation for all mankind.
God is greater than what is believed, and revelation of that is given to them that seek it with their whole heart.
Peace>>>AJ
Last edited:
Sure you can. You can probably answer them as well as any other person reading this. Nothing can be proven at this point either way. Some can be by some quick research. Like for example how the Bible was actually only a few testaments (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc.) out of many who written testaments. They were chosen over the rest, they say, because they were the most reliable sources of Jesus's stories..... even though they were written many years after his death.
There are connections that can be found with a combination of scientific observations on religion, but also some human intuition on human interaction to put it all together. Takes time and a lot of reading, but it's pretty interesting. But also, you seemed to nail most of it below.
true. But also, isolating studies in those categories, such as chemistry, biology, physics, geology, etc... it still makes a common problem of studying the smaller pictures and not the bigger ones. I don't mean to rush the study of science or anything, but it's slow, and can be wrong on occasion.
I still see studies coming out that are just plain wrong, or contradict other studies. Global Warming / Climate Change is a perfect example of this today. they are correct with their information to a degree and then they devide on a few concepts they a few scientists disagree on. Then before we know it, they'll schism like Christianity (Protestant/Catholic) or like Islam (Sunni / Shi'a) And then science ends up having two opposing groups of nerds in lab coats off on their own religious wars over how the world is going to end.
Eventually everybody will start to see that science is much like the other religions. Much more complex in nature then older religions, but so was Christianity to the Greek Mythologies. (Don't forget that Angels, beings up in the clouds and Halos came from Greek/Roman Mythology.)
But what about energy always being constant? You're alive, you're alive, you're alive.... now you're dead. Where did that all go? Did it all just drift off us like a cloud of body heat in the cold?
Or just it all just flick off like a switch?
If so, then once again.... where did that energy go?
In other words juan, you are judging God by man's actions?
I can tell you right now, that mankind is a poor example of who God is, simply because we are handi-capped with the flesh.
But, god gives us individually the strength to rise above the flesh to individually exercises good to wards our neighbor and dignifying the goodness of God.
Love above all else is God. Have we not love as God loves, we have nothing but flesh, and because of that, we have wars.
Peace>>>AJ
Last edited:
No, it didn't, what it did was add a little more confirmation to one of my long-held opinions. Interesting argument, but I can't buy it. It has long seemed pretty much self-evident to me that if god really wanted us to know and understand certain things, he wouldn't have made it necessary to go through such elaborate mental gymnastics and verbal juggling--which most people frankly will not do--to make sense of the book he supposedly gave us that describes and explains it all. If you start from the premise that the Bible must be correct, true, and consistent, as you evidently do, you have to go through an extraordinary dance to maintain that claim, some of it entirely arbitrary as far as I can tell, such as distinguishing between which parts are to be taken literally and which parts are to be read as metaphors and allegories.
He could have made it a lot simpler and easier to understand. I can only conclude that the Bible is not a message from a deity, it's a message from a bunch of fallible men with a variety of changing agendas that mostly are no longer relevant. They simply wrapped themselves in the authority of a fictitious deity to justify their claims, one of the oldest tricks in the world.
Then it's God's fault for not creating us in his image good enough.
But I do that already without the desire to please a God.... but to better myself and others around me. To me, God or Jesus had nothing to do with it. My parents, friends and family did.
If love is God, then that would explain why I felt none in my times of need when I ask for it from him, or at least guidance..... just empty air and my own thoughts and tears..... If there was no love, then there was no God.
And since we have nothing but flesh, and we have wars because of that (Which doesn't make all that much sense to me) Then one again, God made us in his image did he not? Isn't that why he "loved" us so much?
Then why would he design us with the same sadistic desire of gennocide and punnishment, if he was perfect in every way. In his own teachings everyone follows, being perfect is to turn the other cheek, to be kind and generous and all that great stuff.
Yet God/Jesus is more then willing to send us to a burning scrap yard for all the failure designs? Those designs and failures in which he put into us?
Which are a part of him if we are an image of him.... then wouldn't that in turn make him not perfect? If he himself is not perfect either, then why should we follow?
Does he even exist if all the above is true?
Then again it could mean just what it says, Israel will not have any protection from Satan in those final years. That is why the 144,000 are sealed before Satan starts his final 42 months. By the end of that time there will be only those 144,000 drawing breath. While that may seem unkind the whole house does have a resurrection from the grave coming at His return, all past sins are forgiven. (Scripture also says why the whole house of Jacob and Israel take part, not because of themselves being a perfect example, but because they have already been declared to be God's people. Let me know if you want the relevant verses.) This was determined by God back in the book of Jeremiah as punishment for 'the temple leaders' wanting to kill him. The list of who would be involved is in Ch:25. Micah 3 also states the same thing, no protection.
Well I can agree that prophecy had to be fulfilled about Jesus going to the grave, that is why some things were kept hidden from the temple leaders, but only until He was resurrected. What came after that sealed their fate all on it's own. (other than what was determined by the 70 weeks in Daniel). Stoning Stephen was when the 'message' was last given to anybody associated with the temple.
Salvation of the Gentiles was determined back when salvation for anybody was set.
Isa:40:15:
Behold,
the nations are as a drop of a bucket,
and are counted as the small dust of the balance:
behold,
he taketh up the isles as a very little thing.
It probably would be clear if it had been written in a question/answer format, but it wasn't. Luckily it is written in a form that is understandable if all the verses are sorted into subject categories. That means (unfortunately) any question is not going to be answered fully in one set of verses. Searching can indeed be tiring but it is still about the only way to put the pieces of the 'puzzle' together. Wouldn't it have been 'nice of God' to go into much detail about this verse,
Lu:24:27: And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
All it does is open the door to looking through all those books that reference something that is about something that Jesus will do that had not already been accomplished when He spoke those words. References to His arrival as King being one such example. Then as I read through those OT texts I still have to try and determine if what is being said is being said by Christ or by God (future or past).
Are these verses God speaking to Christ, telling Him how to resurrect the ones being referenced? Is Christ the one who is "I" and "me"? That would make Christ the one who was speaking to Ezekiel.
Eze:37:1:
The hand of the LORD was upon me,
and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD,
and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,
Eze:37:2:
And caused me to pass by them round about:
and,
behold,
there were very many in the open valley;
and,
lo,
they were very dry.
Eze:37:3:
And he said unto me,
Son of man,
can these bones live?
And I answered,
O Lord GOD,
thou knowest.
Eze:37:4:
Again he said unto me,
Prophesy upon these bones,
and say unto them,
O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
Eze:37:5:
Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones;
Behold,
I will cause breath to enter into you,
and ye shall live:
Eze:37:6:
And I will lay sinews upon you,
and will bring up flesh upon you,
and cover you with skin,
and put breath in you,
and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.
Eze:37:7:
So I prophesied as I was commanded:
and as I prophesied,
there was a noise,
and behold a shaking,
and the bones came together,
bone to his bone.
Eze:37:8:
And when I beheld,
lo,
the sinews and the flesh came up upon them,
and the skin covered them above:
but there was no breath in them.
Eze:37:9:
Then said he unto me,
Prophesy unto the wind,
prophesy,
son of man,
and say to the wind,
Thus saith the Lord GOD;
Come from the four winds,
O breath,
and breathe upon these slain,
that they may live.
Eze:37:10:
So I prophesied as he commanded me,
and the breath came into them,
and they lived,
and stood up upon their feet,
an exceeding great army.
And on to the end of that chapter.
Unless 'vision' is explicitly mentioned (and a vision usually is followed by an explanation of what the vision means) then literal is what I tend to go with. Are the horsemen if the 6th trump literal just as described. I tend to stay with the literal description only because they would seem to be what 4 fallen angels can be manifested as. They don't reference a backward man describing our current machines of war. If it was, does this mean that when they are destroyed it is diesel-fuel and not their blood that makes the very long river?
Re:14:20:
And the winepress was trodden without the city,
and blood came out of the winepress,
even unto the horse bridles,
by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.
Wouldn't that also mean men would reject it because it was too simple, something any man could pen. It would seem that God had a complete picture and then chopped it up into many little pieces and had many different men write it down over a very long period of time so that each 'author' only had a portion of the complete picture. Daniel is one example of an 'author' who was writing things that he had no idea what was meant but he still wrote it down.
Da:8:26:
And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true:
wherefore shut thou up the vision;
for it shall be for many days.
Da:8:27:
And I Daniel fainted,
and was sick certain days;
afterward I rose up,
and did the king's business;
and I was astonished at the vision,
but none understood it.
This probably was not unique to Daniel, especially for the authors who were recording prophecies.
The only thing I was sure of after reading the NT (of my own free will and it not being a requirement from somebody else) was that 'eat' meant reading Scripture and 'set in order' alluded to what would happen when Christ returned. Nor did I stop at something I didn't understand and try and figure it out before moving onto the next page, I just kept reading and on the next page (or so) there was something I could understand.
1Co:11:34:
And if any man hunger,
let him eat at home;
that ye come not together unto condemnation.
And the rest will I set in order when I come.
As time went on I just developed a taste for getting into the nitty-gritty parts. Not saying I found them all but I did discover that in trying to find answers to some question or another (not always my own questions) I ended up reading lots of verses that had absolutely nothing to do with whatever info I was looking for. More than once I was at the point of "What's the use.", until it dawned on me while the verses I was reading still had information that was new to me on some other subject the Bible covers, that took away a lot of frustration. In hindsight if I now run across something that is new I follow that because I can always come back to the original question but finding that same verse that was about another subject is sometimes near to impossible to find again.
I hope this is some insight on why/how I still find Scripture more than just interesting even though I have gone through much scratching my head and saying "What are you (God) talking about?" on more than one occasion.
Buying books that 'explain the Bible' is a real cop-out. While reading for yourself might seem slower, in the end it is faster to understanding because you have to do a lot less back-tracking.
What is scripture really than stories made up, exagerrated, parsed, translated, altered, invented, embellished and created out of the blue so tribal leaders could control the tribe and churches could get rich and powerful by using them as weapons and threats to control their folllowers.
Sticks and carrots (hell and heavens) have always worked to control the ignorant, and outlandish promises (immotrality, heaven, 70 virgins..) have developed into whole groups of people with nothing better to do than study the minutia of what it all means.It's like the Star Trek groupies who have created a whole fictional life based on another fiction.
Sticks and carrots (hell and heavens) have always worked to control the ignorant, and outlandish promises (immotrality, heaven, 70 virgins..) have developed into whole groups of people with nothing better to do than study the minutia of what it all means.It's like the Star Trek groupies who have created a whole fictional life based on another fiction.