pratt Posted March 21, 2011 Share Posted March 21, 2011 After I join this forum, it made me curious and would like to understand the following. Yes i understand the synod of hippo but Is there information on the following? who are these people who decides what goes in the bible? did they read ALL the documents circulating in the market? did they understand both aramic and greek? did they have all inofrmation at hand? were they able to authenticate the documents? and who has the power to say Relevation or any book is the last book to be ncluded in the bible? Who sets the criteria to what is in and whats not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 21, 2011 Super Moderator Share Posted March 21, 2011 I think you'll find more information on the subject than you'll ever need right here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.B. Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Florduh is, as always, most helpful, but here's a REALLY short summary for the heavy-reading-impaired: What shit they didn't steal from the Jews, they made up. What shit was made up that didn't fit into their power-grabbing scheme, they threw out. See? Helps to be a monolithic, megalomaniacal despot with mewling lackeys at your disposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 28, 2011 Super Moderator Share Posted March 28, 2011 Actually, I think the final decisions were made by Ceiling Cat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babylonian Dream Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Actually, I think the final decisions were made by Ceiling Cat. No, that was for the Old one, the final decisions were actually made by the Almighty Raptor Jesus. The next one will be done by FSM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeshayahuw Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Actually, I think the final decisions were made by Ceiling Cat. No, that was for the Old one, the final decisions were actually made by the Almighty Raptor Jesus. The next one will be done by FSM. im new to this here and i can truly say that the final decisions are made by us alone. the hebrew bible doesn't say anything about a being god. i would just like to educate those who don't atually know what is writen in the bible...to the best of my abilities that is. it wouldn't make sense that an omnipotent being would cry like a little girl and be angry like a man would it? no this is far beyond the concept of what we think It(God) really is. shalom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeshayahuw Posted March 28, 2011 Share Posted March 28, 2011 Actually, I think the final decisions were made by Ceiling Cat. No, that was for the Old one, the final decisions were actually made by the Almighty Raptor Jesus. The next one will be done by FSM. im new to this here and i can truly say that the final decisions are made by us alone. the hebrew bible doesn't say anything about a being god. i would just like to educate those who don't actually know what is written in the bible...to the best of my abilities that is. it wouldn't make sense that an omnipotent being would cry like a little girl and be angry like a man would it? no this is far beyond the concept of what we think It(God) really is. I was just like you guys confused, about what it is that i believed because it went against my logic and what science says i too was once a christian lol shalom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 28, 2011 Super Moderator Share Posted March 28, 2011 the hebrew bible doesn't say anything about a being god. Why, you're absolutely right. How could I have missed that! Thanks for showing us the Truth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest loslogos Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 After I join this forum, it made me curious and would like to understand the following. Yes i understand the synod of hippo but Is there information on the following? who are these people who decides what goes in the bible? did they read ALL the documents circulating in the market? did they understand both aramic and greek? did they have all inofrmation at hand? were they able to authenticate the documents? and who has the power to say Relevation or any book is the last book to be ncluded in the bible? Who sets the criteria to what is in and whats not? The only reliable source of truth is God. The original writings and prophecies that God inspired through the prophets were all changed by unauthorized sinners who didn't even know who God was. The Hebrew language maintained somewhat pure and this is how all the prophets of God heard the stories of creation, Noah and the flood, Abraham, Israel, Moses, freedom from Egyptian slavery, etc. After the Jews were captives in Babylon, they learned the gentile language of Aramaic which was full of pagan ideas and this was the reason the Hebrew language got tainted. They ended up changing the scriptures into their new dialects between Hebrew and Aramaic and by the time the messiah came to preach the gospel, the scriptures were perverted. God was using the flesh of Jesus to intepret the prophecies so he knew the Jews had changed them. The prophecies were written in very heavy symbolism so they remained okay for God to use, even though they changed the language in them. The Persians, Greeks, and Romans also had this beast in their minds, which Daniel described in the prophecies God had him write. The beast is the religious mindset in the unschosen sinners who had the pagan ideas in their language. This beast kept them from the truth of God so when the messiah, who we accept as Jesus, began preaching the gospel, no one understood the truth that came forth from voice, except God's chosen ones, who would later become sinless saints and preach the same gospel. The Jewish Pharisees became jealous of Jesus so sought his death by the Romans who understood the Jews better than Jesus. After killing Jesus, the disciples, who were chosen ones of God, became sinless saints and they went out preaching the gospel like Jesus was doing. This made the jealous Jewish Pharisees jealous and angry so they told the Romans that these saints would end up taking over their empire. The Romans passed a law to stop the gospel with a penalty of death to the preacher. By the time they killed all the saints in the early fourth century, all that was left were their followers, called children of God. The Romans didn't have any laws against the followers so they couldn't just kill them. Instead, they got them involved in their first Roman Catholic churches and gave them new rules and creeds to use. The biggest deception was the new testament they produced that was guaranteed to deceive these followers. They had confiscated most of the private writings of the saints they killed and used a few of them for their gospels and testaments. They had to get rid of anything to do with the true gospel and then added their pagan ideas and language to them that totally deceived these children of God. Never again did they become sinless saints who preached the gospel that Jesus and the saints preached. The false gospels that the Romans gave them to use have deceived every single Christian whoever lived. Many of them escaped religion but they're still confused because of these false teachings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babylonian Dream Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 im new to this here and i can truly say that the final decisions are made by us alone. the hebrew bible doesn't say anything about a being god. i would just like to educate those who don't atually know what is writen in the bible... to the best of my abilities that is. Actually, it does. I've read the Old Testament in 2 languages, Biblical Hebrew (ehrm.... I wouldn't really call it a single language, but that's what everyone else does) and english (Early Modern and Modern). I didnt read the new testament in anything other than english though. It actually describes God as a physical being in several places, with human emotions (regret, anger, jealousy, etc...), doing human things (going to war, etc...). No need to be condescending. I'm actually very well read on this topic. I know a considerable lot on this topic. it wouldn't make sense that an omnipotent being would cry like a little girl and be angry like a man would it? no this is far beyond the concept of what we think It(God) really is. And it is far beyond what the Hebrew Bible describes God as. It says God is Omnipotent, but it also says he isn't. Though the parts that say he's omnipotent, could easily be figures of speech, also used by the Babylonians. Their gods could do anything, but cheat the laws of physics, death, fate, etc... forever. Like the Bible's God/Gods (and there are many of them, if you've actually read the text before the masoretic), which are also semitic, and are very similar to the Babylonian and Canaanite ones. Argueably, they're the same gods as the Babylonian and Canaanite ones. The reason I think that they're actually the same can be a topic of another discussion. But it has to do with the natural evolution of religions and cultures over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babylonian Dream Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The only reliable source of truth is God. The original writings and prophecies that God inspired through the prophets were all changed by unauthorized sinners who didn't even know who God was. The Hebrew language maintained somewhat pure and this is how all the prophets of God heard the stories of creation, Noah and the flood, Abraham, Israel, Moses, freedom from Egyptian slavery, etc. After the Jews were captives in Babylon, they learned the gentile language of Aramaic which was full of pagan ideas and this was the reason the Hebrew language got tainted. They ended up changing the scriptures into their new dialects between Hebrew and Aramaic and by the time the messiah came to preach the gospel, the scriptures were perverted. God was using the flesh of Jesus to intepret the prophecies so he knew the Jews had changed them. Actually, Babylonian was the religion of Babylon until the Persian era. Babylonian evolved from Akkadian. There are many ideas of how monotheism came to the Israelites, one of the likely ideas is that it came to them through the Babylonians, because of how similar the first ideas of "one-god" theisms in the older texts are to the Babylonian idea. Being that there are so many pagan influences on the text, to your own admission, how do you know when and where something is or isn't a pagan influence? How do you tell what is God's word and what isn't? You say the hebrew language is pure? Yeah... right. Have you actually read the hebrew? It's not pure, its actually quite messy. Its a mix up of different dialects, styles, authors, vocabularies, etc... As for the prophets, they sound alot like the pagan ones you so despise. I don't just mean that as in their similar, I kind of mean that literally. Some prophets of the Gods that were also the names of the prophets of the Gods: Daniel Balaam (he's quite literally the same in the pagan aramaic inscriptions as he is in the Bible, just replace Yahweh with Athtar). As for the stories of creation, Noah and the flood, Abraham, Israel, Moses, freedom from Egyptian slavery, etc. If I was to mention the closest things ever to the stories in the Babylonian myths, even more so than Greek, and even the canaanite mythos for crying out loud, I'd mention the Bible, and in particular, the stories of creation, the descendants of Adam, the flood and Noah, Abraham (though he's a mix of characters, but may of been originally a hebrew hero), Moses especially, etc... Joseph is just the hebrew remaking of a few Egyptian stories. There was only a few authors of the Bible, they were all human, and none had connections to God. If God is beyond our comprehension, he is beyond our reach, beyond our knowledge, and as a result, we can not know of him. If we can't know of him, and there is something we know of, then that which we know of can't be him. Therefore, as a result, we can't believe in God if he is real. Let alone get prophecies from him. The prophecies were written in very heavy symbolism so they remained okay for God to use, even though they changed the language in them. The Persians, Greeks, and Romans also had this beast in their minds, which Daniel described in the prophecies God had him write. The beast is the religious mindset in the unschosen sinners who had the pagan ideas in their language. This beast kept them from the truth of God so when the messiah, who we accept as Jesus, began preaching the gospel, no one understood the truth that came forth from voice, except God's chosen ones, who would later become sinless saints and preach the same gospel. Daniel just happens to be one of those late late texts. It displays practices done by greeks and romans (remember Daniel and the lions? yeah... stuff like that isn't what the babylonians did). Furthermore, the Canaanites also had a Daniel, but he was a bit different from your daniel, and is likely different altogether. Interesting, because the idea of what Jesus is is from Zoroastrian influences, the original "savior" was simply a king sent by god to defeat the Romans and establish a hebrew old testament, 3rd world style kindom in Israel. It had nothing to do with morality and all this other stuff it means now to people. As for the Jesus of the Bible, he was far from a good guy. Let's keep to the Bible's words, or we don't. The Bible has him causing disturbances in temples, causing scenes, misquoting scripture, etc.... You want to know about what the Old Testament says should've happened to him? He should've been put to death according to it. So apparently, the jews were just following gods orders by putting him to death (even though they'd have nothing to do with it, the romans were in charge, and they crucified him, implying he did more than preach a gospel, it implies he started a war against them). The romans weren't too fond of rebels, but they had more religions and cults thrive in their lands, they just didn't care. As long as they didn't cause problems for the state and what it wanted. The Jewish Pharisees became jealous of Jesus so sought his death by the Romans who understood the Jews better than Jesus. After killing Jesus, the disciples, who were chosen ones of God, became sinless saints and they went out preaching the gospel like Jesus was doing. This made the jealous Jewish Pharisees jealous and angry so they told the Romans that these saints would end up taking over their empire. The Romans passed a law to stop the gospel with a penalty of death to the preacher. By the time they killed all the saints in the early fourth century, all that was left were their followers, called children of God. I'd love to know what the romans cared about what the jews wanted. The christians were actually treated better than the jews, as the jews were constantly causing trouble for the empire. The romans didn't just crucify people because they didn't like them, it was a very specific penalty for specific sets of purposes. It was to end dissent. The collesseum is where they through everyone else. The writers of the "gospels" were trying to paint him as an active, violent dissenter. The Romans didn't have any laws against the followers so they couldn't just kill them. Instead, they got them involved in their first Roman Catholic churches and gave them new rules and creeds to use. The biggest deception was the new testament they produced that was guaranteed to deceive these followers. They had confiscated most of the private writings of the saints they killed and used a few of them for their gospels and testaments. They had to get rid of anything to do with the true gospel and then added their pagan ideas and language to them that totally deceived these children of God. Never again did they become sinless saints who preached the gospel that Jesus and the saints preached. The false gospels that the Romans gave them to use have deceived every single Christian whoever lived. Many of them escaped religion but they're still confused because of these false teachings. Actually, no. The Romans had very open policies towards most religions, so long as they weren't associated with rebellions against the empire. When there were more and more roman christians, it was easier to deal with them if they had one faith. So Constantine had the christians decide on a dogma, and the one that won out was Christ as God. Constantine had more important issues on his northern and eastern borders to worry about, than corrupting some religion he didn't even like (he only pretended to because christians were becoming a significant population in his empire). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest loslogos Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The only reliable source of truth is God. The original writings and prophecies that God inspired through the prophets were all changed by unauthorized sinners who didn't even know who God was. The Hebrew language maintained somewhat pure and this is how all the prophets of God heard the stories of creation, Noah and the flood, Abraham, Israel, Moses, freedom from Egyptian slavery, etc. After the Jews were captives in Babylon, they learned the gentile language of Aramaic which was full of pagan ideas and this was the reason the Hebrew language got tainted. They ended up changing the scriptures into their new dialects between Hebrew and Aramaic and by the time the messiah came to preach the gospel, the scriptures were perverted. God was using the flesh of Jesus to intepret the prophecies so he knew the Jews had changed them. Actually, Babylonian was the religion of Babylon until the Persian era. Babylonian evolved from Akkadian. There are many ideas of how monotheism came to the Israelites, one of the likely ideas is that it came to them through the Babylonians, because of how similar the first ideas of "one-god" theisms in the older texts are to the Babylonian idea. Being that there are so many pagan influences on the text, to your own admission, how do you know when and where something is or isn't a pagan influence? How do you tell what is God's word and what isn't? You say the hebrew language is pure? Yeah... right. Have you actually read the hebrew? It's not pure, its actually quite messy. Its a mix up of different dialects, styles, authors, vocabularies, etc... As for the prophets, they sound alot like the pagan ones you so despise. I don't just mean that as in their similar, I kind of mean that literally. Some prophets of the Gods that were also the names of the prophets of the Gods: Daniel Balaam (he's quite literally the same in the pagan aramaic inscriptions as he is in the Bible, just replace Yahweh with Athtar). As for the stories of creation, Noah and the flood, Abraham, Israel, Moses, freedom from Egyptian slavery, etc. If I was to mention the closest things ever to the stories in the Babylonian myths, even more so than Greek, and even the canaanite mythos for crying out loud, I'd mention the Bible, and in particular, the stories of creation, the descendants of Adam, the flood and Noah, Abraham (though he's a mix of characters, but may of been originally a hebrew hero), Moses especially, etc... Joseph is just the hebrew remaking of a few Egyptian stories. There was only a few authors of the Bible, they were all human, and none had connections to God. If God is beyond our comprehension, he is beyond our reach, beyond our knowledge, and as a result, we can not know of him. If we can't know of him, and there is something we know of, then that which we know of can't be him. Therefore, as a result, we can't believe in God if he is real. Let alone get prophecies from him. The prophecies were written in very heavy symbolism so they remained okay for God to use, even though they changed the language in them. The Persians, Greeks, and Romans also had this beast in their minds, which Daniel described in the prophecies God had him write. The beast is the religious mindset in the unschosen sinners who had the pagan ideas in their language. This beast kept them from the truth of God so when the messiah, who we accept as Jesus, began preaching the gospel, no one understood the truth that came forth from voice, except God's chosen ones, who would later become sinless saints and preach the same gospel. Daniel just happens to be one of those late late texts. It displays practices done by greeks and romans (remember Daniel and the lions? yeah... stuff like that isn't what the babylonians did). Furthermore, the Canaanites also had a Daniel, but he was a bit different from your daniel, and is likely different altogether. Interesting, because the idea of what Jesus is is from Zoroastrian influences, the original "savior" was simply a king sent by god to defeat the Romans and establish a hebrew old testament, 3rd world style kindom in Israel. It had nothing to do with morality and all this other stuff it means now to people. As for the Jesus of the Bible, he was far from a good guy. Let's keep to the Bible's words, or we don't. The Bible has him causing disturbances in temples, causing scenes, misquoting scripture, etc.... You want to know about what the Old Testament says should've happened to him? He should've been put to death according to it. So apparently, the jews were just following gods orders by putting him to death (even though they'd have nothing to do with it, the romans were in charge, and they crucified him, implying he did more than preach a gospel, it implies he started a war against them). The romans weren't too fond of rebels, but they had more religions and cults thrive in their lands, they just didn't care. As long as they didn't cause problems for the state and what it wanted. The Jewish Pharisees became jealous of Jesus so sought his death by the Romans who understood the Jews better than Jesus. After killing Jesus, the disciples, who were chosen ones of God, became sinless saints and they went out preaching the gospel like Jesus was doing. This made the jealous Jewish Pharisees jealous and angry so they told the Romans that these saints would end up taking over their empire. The Romans passed a law to stop the gospel with a penalty of death to the preacher. By the time they killed all the saints in the early fourth century, all that was left were their followers, called children of God. I'd love to know what the romans cared about what the jews wanted. The christians were actually treated better than the jews, as the jews were constantly causing trouble for the empire. The romans didn't just crucify people because they didn't like them, it was a very specific penalty for specific sets of purposes. It was to end dissent. The collesseum is where they through everyone else. The writers of the "gospels" were trying to paint him as an active, violent dissenter. The Romans didn't have any laws against the followers so they couldn't just kill them. Instead, they got them involved in their first Roman Catholic churches and gave them new rules and creeds to use. The biggest deception was the new testament they produced that was guaranteed to deceive these followers. They had confiscated most of the private writings of the saints they killed and used a few of them for their gospels and testaments. They had to get rid of anything to do with the true gospel and then added their pagan ideas and language to them that totally deceived these children of God. Never again did they become sinless saints who preached the gospel that Jesus and the saints preached. The false gospels that the Romans gave them to use have deceived every single Christian whoever lived. Many of them escaped religion but they're still confused because of these false teachings. Actually, no. The Romans had very open policies towards most religions, so long as they weren't associated with rebellions against the empire. When there were more and more roman christians, it was easier to deal with them if they had one faith. So Constantine had the christians decide on a dogma, and the one that won out was Christ as God. Constantine had more important issues on his northern and eastern borders to worry about, than corrupting some religion he didn't even like (he only pretended to because christians were becoming a significant population in his empire). The beast has to defend the beast or else they have to admit the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Babylonian Dream Posted March 29, 2011 Share Posted March 29, 2011 The beast has to defend the beast or else they have to admit the truth. Because that's just an answer. I actually don't defend what the Roman Empire did, I'm just saying that you don't have a clue what you were talking about. I've got no anger or any negative emotions towards you, God, the Bible, nor anything else. I actually like the Bible the same as I do the Bhagavad Gita, Illiad, Odyssey, Theogony, Poetic Edda, Enuma Elish, Gilgamesh Epic, etc... as a literary work of art. You just make baseless claims and don't defend them. You made a position, that not only is there a god, but that you are that God, and you have to defend that claim. You are the one who is either telling the truth or a lie, as an atheist, I make no real claim. I just don't believe there is a God, I have no reason to, let alone a reason to believe that you are that God. Your religion is no less deluded than that of Juche, Cao Dai, Shinto, Buddhism, Daoism, Confucianism, Wicca, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Paganism, etc... etc... etc... And is just as truthful as well.... And none are very truthful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 29, 2011 Super Moderator Share Posted March 29, 2011 Crackpot theories and assertions about the Bible and church history have a pretty tough time around here. Many of our members are former pastors, teachers, scholars, and some are even adept in the original languages. It's probably best to avoid attempts to teach those who actually know the facts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FourDogBrewing Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 the hebrew bible doesn't say anything about a being god. Why, you're absolutely right. How could I have missed that! Thanks for showing us the Truth! This made me laugh so hard I had to post just to let you know. Well played, well played. hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts