I'm conflicted about the Bible. Will you discuss it with me?
- Thread starter Conflicted
- Start date
Thought I'd bring the conversation back to the Bible. I looked for references to hammers. Came across, in my search, the word "knop." As this word is not in my everyday vocabulary, I looked "knop" up. The dictionary said its etymology is from the High German "knopf." That explanation certainly clarifies matters. You see, the Bible is readily understood, as long as one puts in a modicum of effort.
Good advice. However, there's at least one god that demands actual belief in it or else you are toast (unless you renounce your disbelief). And that's regardless of how good you are as a person.
Coffee containers work for me.
Incompetence? Lack of intelligence? Lack of existence? Anyone's guess is good. lol
Opine definition from the Oxford dictionary;
"Pronunciation: /ə(ʊ)ˈpʌɪn/
verb
[reporting verb] formal
hold and state as one’s opinion:
[with direct speech]:
‘The man is a genius,’ he opined
[with clause]:
the headmistress opined that the outing would make a nice change for Flora
Origin:
late Middle English: from Latin opinari 'think, believe"
From Merriam-Webster;
"Definition of OPINE
intransitive verb
: to express opinions
transitive verb
: to state as an opinion"
According to the KJ (Cambridge version); John 9
"1And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. 4I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. 5As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. 6When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, "
I'd imagine that would be quite painful.
"1And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. 4I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. 5As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. 6When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, "
I'd imagine that would be quite painful.
Did the blind man say anything to indicate it was an unpleasant experience? Dry dust would have been very unpleasant.
Good eye though.
Good eye though.
This brings up the question, if the man was blind since birth, how could it have been caused by him sinning, unless he sinned in a previous life? Reincarnation was a commonly held belief at the time, so it would be logical for the disciples to ask the question. Also, there is evidence that Jesus spent some of the missing 18 years (from 12 - 30) studying in India under Buddhist and Hindu teachers, which would account for the radical changes he made in the orthodox Jewish religious doctrines of the day. If you compair the eastern religious teachings with those of Jesus, you will see a striking similarity. Almost all references to reincarnation were removed by Constantine and subsequent popes over the next millennium.
Not in the NT.
Heb:9:27:
And as it is appointed unto men once to die,
but after this the judgment:
Heb:9:27:
And as it is appointed unto men once to die,
but after this the judgment:
Palestine was a hub for trade between east, west and south. Jesus would have had easy access not only to other cultures but traveling to India would have been extremely easy as caravans were headed there all the time. Like today, there were probably varying degrees of adherence to any religious teachings and dogma. Not everybody in every religion is as dogmatic as you. If you would pull your head out of the book once in a while, you might find some background information and history of the period. The bible stories did not exist in a vacuum and neither did the Jews. There were civilizations all over the world long before the Israelites stopped wondering around aimlessly in the desert. Many of them influenced their cultural development.
Evidence of massive non-Biblical flash floods in Washington State....
washington scablands - Google Search
washington scablands - Google Search
Still, on a global scale, a minute localized area. You could probably find similar flood evidence all over the planet, but would the dating coincide.
There are lots of similar topographies formed by floods at the end of the Wisconsonian but they are seperated by hundreds to thousands of years.
I believe some river valleys are being re-examined for signs of fast moving water over slow ice as being the last agent of nature that resulted in the current terrain. To expand on that type of flood once you get to the foothills you have long gravel bars that are many the size of the ones in Montana (ripples that are some 10's of feet high) That isn't saying glaciers over 100' of advances and retreats didn't move a lot of material, just that in some areas the material was last moved by water and not ice. The 'ripples that are 100 ft high should still be made by ice.
I saw your post conflicted, and signed up myself,seemes you have similar beliefs to my own,I would describe myself as a non religious christian,will look out for your posts in the future.
The main thing is... don't get too hung up on the Old Testament.
It's only there because early Christian missionaries trying to convert gentiles to the New Testament learned that the gentiles didn't have a clue what was so New about the New Testament without first explaining to the gentiles what the New Testament had evolved from... and so missionaries started including Jewish Torah as a primer, calling it the Old Testmanet, in order to first convert gentiles to Judaism before being able to convert them to Christianity.
If you are going to be Judeao-Christian, which means someone dedicated to both the Old and New Testament, versus pure Christian, which means someone guided just by the New Testament, you'll have to learn to put things into perspective.
For example, the Book of Genesis and the Creation. It's not bad. In fact it's suprisingly accurate given what Joe goat-herder knew about science. It basically tracks what science believes was the early history of the universe and the formation of the earth. It started with a flash of light (the big bang), eventually the heavens separated from the earth (planets condensed from dust), then plants, fish, fowl and animals came along, and finally humans. That's what fossils show.
Does it say that the world is a flat disk riding on the back of a turtle? No... about the only thing anyone can find to pick on about it is how long it took, i.e. what's the definition of a day, even though it says right there that night-and-day as God sees it was happening before the Sun happened, which means God doesn't track a day according to a solar cycle the way humans do. Crumb... some modern humans with access to modern science have trouble with that one. Can you imagine how hard it was to teach the basic story of Creation to a bunch of goat-herders? People should be amazed that given the litteracy of the time, that the Genesis Creation story should turn out to be so darn close to what science is finding.
In any case, If you want to dig into the Old Testament and use that as your primary guide, then save yourself the headache and go to a Synagogue, convert to Judaism, and let some Rabis explain what it all means, otherwise you might have bad dreams about throwing unwanted babies into the flaming mouth of idol Baal because you didn't know how to use birth-control, and/or your head can get messed up by preachers ranting against gays (evidently because Moses found it personally revolting) while those same preachers blissfully skip over the parts saying you're not supposed to eat shrimp cocktail and how it's okay to sell your daughter into slavery because she got that tatoo, etc.
I can see you and Jesus are going to be having a long talk some day. Without the OT prophecies you lose out on all the fine detail of the NT prophecies, for instance the NT version and OT version of Holy Angels gathering the wicked.
M't:13:41:
The Son of man shall send forth his angels,
and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend,
and them which do iniquity;
Joe:2:1-11:
Blow ye the trumpet in Zion,
and sound an alarm in my holy mountain:
let all the inhabitants of the land tremble:
for the day of the LORD cometh,
for it is nigh at hand;
A day of darkness and of gloominess,
a day of clouds and of thick darkness,
as the morning spread upon the mountains:
a great people and a strong; there hath not been ever the like,
neither shall be any more after it,
even to the years of many generations.
A fire devoureth before them;
and behind them a flame burneth:
the land is as the garden of Eden before them,
and behind them a desolate wilderness;
yea,
and nothing shall escape them.
The appearance of them is as the appearance of horses;
and as horsemen,
so shall they run.
Like the noise of chariots on the tops of mountains shall they leap,
like the noise of a flame of fire that devoureth the stubble,
as a strong people set in battle array.
Before their face the people shall be much pained: all faces shall gather blackness.
They shall run like mighty men;
they shall climb the wall like men of war;
and they shall march every one on his ways,
and they shall not break their ranks:
Neither shall one thrust another;
they shall walk every one in his path:
and when they fall upon the sword,
they shall not be wounded.
They shall run to and fro in the city;
they shall run upon the wall,
they shall climb up upon the houses;
they shall enter in at the windows like a thief.
The earth shall quake before them;
the heavens shall tremble:
the sun and the moon shall be dark,
and the stars shall withdraw their shining:
And the LORD shall utter his voice before his army:
for his camp is very great:
for he is strong that executeth his word:
for the day of the LORD is great and very terrible;
and who can abide it?
Many other passages are as descriptive and not all are about punishment, that is why the OT prophecy is there. The rest of the OT is mostly about the bruise to the heel that was the cross so they have a limited value when reading about the other bruise.