One Verse At A Time...

[white_raven23]

and what proof did they provide for this extraordinary claim?The book of mormon and Quran are also claims to be inspired by God. How is the claims of Joseph Smith and Mohammed different than than the other writers?

 

Comes down to choice. I choose to accept the Bible likewise accepting what Isaiah, Paul and all the others say about the divine inspiriation they received.

 

 

WHAT!?

 

How can you throw that off the cuff like that? "Comes down to choice" my white ass! Or are you just vindictively cruel?

 

According to the religion you embraced to the exclusion of common sense, reason, and intelligence, people following other paths like Islam, are destined for damnation for following the "wrong" god or believing in a "false" truth.

 

You answer shows very clearly and without mistake that you have no true empathy for people's choices when eternity itself is on the line (your belief...not ours). So it's pretty hard for me to image that you give two shits to the wind about anything real. Either THAT or deep down you know your dance is just one more dance, and you have no true idea of the outcome. If you really did "know" your path was the absolute truth, and if you were human at all, you'd be losing your mind screaming in the streets trying to save everyone you see.

[Guest sub_zer0]

WHAT!?

 

How can you throw that off the cuff like that? "Comes down to choice" my white ass! Or are you just vindictively cruel?

 

According to the religion you embraced to the exclusion of common sense, reason, and intelligence, people following other paths like Islam, are destined for damnation for following the "wrong" god or believing in a "false" truth.

 

Yep, their choice.

 

You answer shows very clearly and without mistake that you have no true empathy for people's choices when eternity itself is on the line (your belief...not ours). So it's pretty hard for me to image that you give two shits to the wind about anything real. Either THAT or deep down you know your dance is just one more dance, and you have no true idea of the outcome. If you really did "know" your path was the absolute truth, and if you were human at all, you'd be losing your mind screaming in the streets trying to save everyone you see.

 

No true empathy? Who is sharing you the truth right now to save you from eternal hell? Like I said it is all a choice. I choose this you choose that. For you to say, because I say you can choose what to believe, I now have no true empathy? I am sharing it with you all right now.

[SkepticOfBible]

and what proof did they provide for this extraordinary claim?The book of mormon and Quran are also claims to be inspired by God. How is the claims of Joseph Smith and Mohammed different than than the other writer

 

In other words you cannot give a objective criteria by which you can determine which claims are true or false.

 

So because you Sub_Zero (or whatever your real name is) personally believe the bible is true, therefore it is true.

 

They aren't different, in fact they present people with choices, which is a good thing.

 

It may be a good thing, but certainly not helpful. One claim is the same as the other.

 

So explain the reason behind the existence of different canons?

 

And why were these canons decided by men?And once again on what authority did they decide on the canon?

 

Why does your god allow false books to exist, without providing a objective method to determine the true one

 

Great questions about canon... It is a tricky subject.

 

The books that make-up the word of God were not decided by men to begin with as God is the author, mankind rather discerned what to be included as such because so many other books had surfaced. They did so by the authority of Christ!

 

Can this assertion ever been proven?

 

What evidence did they provide of this authority?

 

All the followers of particular canon(including you) would assert that they had the authority of christ behind their respective canon.

 

However none of them can provide supernatural evidence for this extraordinary claim.

 

You say that God was the author of your books, but he also allowed competiting books to come up, and then left the decision to "imperfect" men to decide which of the books consist of the "perfect word of god".

 

Once again you have no extraordinary evidence that these God wrote these books,?

 

There are false books, but there is only one canon. The objective method is to base the entirety of the Bible on those other books and see if they match up. They do not and thankfully the apocrypha were not ever seriously considered.

 

Really, and off course the fact that most of the early church used the apocrypha, doesn't concern you.

 

What objective method are they using. What is it that they are matching up against?And why is "imperfect" men doing this job?

 

Once again "true" Church of Christ is based on personal preference and nothing more.

 

Each of the various sects of christians claim to be "true" church of christ.

 

The church of Christ is based on Christ's preferences, teachings and life, not man. It is quite easy to distinguish real from fake believers. Jesus spoke of this to give us discernment when needed in this area. If what it says in Ephesians and other places isn't the aim of the church that claims to be the church for Christ, it is not true...

.........

 

Every christian sect makes the same claim(all of them they say that they are the true church of christ.

 

It is only easy to distinguish for you because you believe you are are real believer.

 

How is skeptic supposed to distinguish a real from fake believer?

 

Because it is directly related to Christ. If the denomination is built upon Christ of the Bible it is solid.

 

Which christian sect doesn't claim that their denomination is built upon Christ of the Bible it is solid. . Once again they all make the same assertion.

 

Only if there is unity within Christ can mankind become united in Him.

 

Of course it has, there are literally billions of Christians in this world. Including me who is a walking testimony to the prayer of Jesus for His church.

Are these billions of christian real christians?Are catholics real christians?are JW real christians?Are mormons real christians?

 

Apparently these billions of christians cannot even come to an agreement in their chosen religion on single issue.

 

Yes I know. God gives us all choices to either ultimately accept Him or not. Accepting Him -- meaning the Bible in this case -- or not accept Him, anything else but the Bible.

 

Apparently your god also gave us a range of bible(canon)? So which is is the correct one again?

 

When did god ever come down and give his bible?What is the proof that the bible is from god?

 

The Bible never changes from the one who wrote it, obviously that being God through man.

 

Please don't lie, I have provided you with evidence that the manuscripts have been altered by men not God. Did god asked for these alterations?

 

The only man-made part about the Bible is the fact that we had to discern and unite the books that were in fact God's word.

 

So in other words, books are decided at the theological whims of men.

 

The OT canon was finalized by the times of Jesus, so the NT is really the one we should be debating in its canonicity.

The OT canon was finalized by the times of Jesus!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Are you talking about this canon

 

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbible5.html

 

Finally, around 90 AD, after much debate, 39 books were declared to comprise the Hebrew Bible, known to Christians as the "Old Testament." To Jews, of course, it's just the Bible. In one of the greatest successes of Jewish tradition, the list of canonical books has remained constant to this day. There are three large sections: Law (Torah or Pentateuch), Prophets (books telling the history of Israel, both histories and prophetic works) and Writings (psalms, proverbs, and wisdom literature).

 

The canon was finalised after 70 year alleged death of JC(which certainly not "by the times of Jesus").

 

You said the canon was decided under the authority of Christ

 

So obviously this coucil of jewish clerics had the authority of christ too right.

 

Well not suprisingly this council under the authority of JC rejected the NT.

 

and earlier you said

Accepting Him -- meaning the Bible in this case -- or not accept Him, anything else but the Bible.

 

There are false books, but there is only one canon.

 

So logically you are right.

 

There can be only one canon and one set of "true" books, and that is the "hebrew" bible.

 

So that means I don't have read the set of false "books" known as the NT.

 

You heard him loud and clear the Hebrew canon is the "true canon".

 

Thanks very much for your time. Your task is done, because you shown me the true bible.

[crazy-tiger]

We started with #1 - you said that the reason you chose the Ebla tablets is that archeaology could date the use of the word "Canaan" to earlier times than previously established.

 

We decided that archeaology's ability to "date" historical evidence was a valid line of thought to pursue.. and that line of thought has now brought us to this point. Archeaologically speaking Sumerian mythology pre-dates Genesis by 100s of years. There is no way Sumerian mythology could have been copied from Genesis. The parallels between the two bodies of mythology are numerous and span many different stories. (See above for details - go to the linked site for questions - I'm not revisiting it).

 

Your choices now.

 

A. Drop # 1 (Ebla tablets) from your list of archeaological evidence for your position. (Oh by the way check the rest of your list - if any of it depends on archeaology's ability to put things on a time line - take it off your list).

 

or .....

 

B. Drop your insistence that Noah's Ark was an actual event, you would also have to drop your insistence that a huge chunk of Genesis is an actual event - since Sumerian mythology parallels the creation myth - garden of eden, etc...

What is it going to be Sub? Choice A or Choice B?

 

I will choose C. I will keep Ebla tablets to legitimize the Bible to you guys in its use of the word "Canaan."

Using your own argument, since part of it is verified, then all of it is true. As such, it also legitimizes Sumerian mythology.

 

To stay true to your argument, you must now accept that Sumerian mythology as true. To do anything else is to be hypocritical.

 

 

 

Based on your behaviour, you're gonna be a hypocrite...

[SkepticOfBible]

 

Using your own argument, since part of it is verified, then all of it is true. As such, it also legitimizes Sumerian mythology.

 

Spot on Sub_zero believes every claim is true untill proven false. So now he has to prove the claims of archealogy as false.

 

BTW for others, here is more info regarding the textual intergrity of the bible

 

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/text.html

Unauthentic Texts in the New Testament

 

Apart from the problem of canonical books, there is a related problem about the contents of the books themselves. Many texts in the Bible were later insertions into the original (or more correctly, most ancient) texts but were, in many cases, left in there due to "tradition". We will look here at three of the more famous bogus passages in the New Testament.

 

The Johanine Comma

We will start our example with one passage that has today been taken out of the Bible but was once left in the scriptures long after the compilers knew it was not a part of the original text.

 

The eminent printed editions of the Greek New Testament (at least until the end of the nineteenth century) was refered to as the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus as we have seen was a faulty text based on late and unreliable Greek manuscripts. However due to the accolade it received, it remained the main Greek New Testament text used by scholars and translators until the end of the nineteenth century.

 

It was only towards the end of the nineteenth century that the evidence accumulated became so overwhelming that Christian scholars has to reluctantly admit that the Textus was inaccurate and based on manuscripts written far later than the period of the original texts. [2] So for a period spanning four centuries the Textus Receptus, faults and all reigned supreme. But it did not go unchallenged.

 

Edward Gibbon(1737-1794) in his most famous work The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1788), pointed out that the church fathers defeated heretics by forged testimonies. These fathers went so far as to alter the text of the Holy Scripture itself. He pointed out one passage in particular:(which can still be seen today in the King James Version)

 

I John 5:7-8 (KJV)

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.

And there are three that witness on earth, the Spirit, the Water and the Blood and these three agree in one.

 

This passage, known as the Johanine Comma, had long been used by Christians to prove the truth of the doctrine of the Trinity. Gibbon pointed out that this text (the italicized portion above) was never quoted by the earliest church fathers, nor does it appear in any Greek manuscript earlier than the fifteenth century. And even among these late manuscripts, there are only three that have this addition. In fact the earliest appearance was in Latin manuscripts around 400 CE and its earliest quotation was from the western theologian Priscillian (late 4th century CE). In short it was a later dishonest insertion into the Bible.

 

Why then did Christian scholars continue to accept it although it was obviously false? Gibbon claimed that Erasmus knew the passage was false but kept it out of prudence and that both the Catholic and Protestant Churches stuck to the spurious text out of "honest bigotry". In other words, the churches were trying to defend the doctrine of the Trinity by fraudulent means! [3]

 

Other Unauthentic Texts

 

Since the end of the nineteenth century the Johanine Comma is no longer included in modern translations of the Bible. However there are still passages in the Bible that continued to be included in these modern translations (although nowadays they are mostly placed in bracketts) although all evidence point towards them not being in the ancient manuscripts.

 

The first passage is the story of the woman taken in adultery which was included in the Textus Receptus in John 8:1-11. This passage however is absent from the earliest manuscripts. Nowhere does it appear in the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus and most of the later Greek manuscripts also omit it. In some manuscripts it appears not in the gospel of John but in Luke (after Luke 21:38)! All the earliest translations of the Bible, the Syriac, the Coptic and Armenian versions are all agreed in not including the passage. The passage was unknown to Christian writers before Ambrose (340-397) and Augustine (354-430). These considerations show conclusively that we have here another late and fraudulent insertion into the Bible. That it is still not taken out from the Bible today is a modern example of what Gibbon called "honest bigotry". [4]

 

Another passage that is known to be a late insertion is Mark 16:9-20. This passage is found neither in the Vaticanus nor the Sinaiticus. It is also noticeably absent from the Syriac and Armenian manuscripts. One can perhaps understand why Christian theologians are hesitant to throw this passage out, despite the compelling proofs of its lateness and lack of authenticity. The fraudulent passage in Mark is the very portion that describes the resurrection of Jesus. Another case included under "honest bigotry" and" pious fraud".

 

Of course modern textual critics have found even more passages and verses in the traditonal text that are bogus or (to use a more neutral term) unauthentic. We gave examples for around 100 such verses elsewhere in this website.

[Antlerman]

The fact that Zero is still here is proof positive he is an admitted troll, manipulating every single one of us for his personal jollies. I quote his own words here:

 

I decided to conduct a bit of an experiment to see how atheists react to Christians, specifically ones defending the Inerrancy of the Bible that comes from Textual Criticism so to speak.

 

http://www.todayshistory.info/articles_ref...eist/index.html

 

Zero is a bonified, self-confessed TROLL. He is a sociopath who views us not as people, but objects that he is manipulating for own his perverse amuzment. He is playing a game with every one of us, nothing more. He is not serious about anything he has to say. He is not a Christian.

[Amanda]

The fact that Zero is still here is proof positive he is an admitted troll, manipulating every single one of us for his personal jollies. I quote his own words here:

 

I decided to conduct a bit of an experiment to see how atheists react to Christians, specifically ones defending the Inerrancy of the Bible that comes from Textual Criticism so to speak.

 

http://www.todayshistory.info/articles_ref...eist/index.html

 

Zero is a bonified, self-confessed TROLL. He is a sociopath who views us not as people, but objects that he is manipulating for own his perverse amuzment. He is playing a game with every one of us, nothing more. He is not serious about anything he has to say. He is not a Christian.

 

Antlerman, how long was I here before some of these insightful messages finally had an effect on my thinking? (And I didn't even believe in a real place of hell outside one's mind!)

 

Sub Zero, if you think you know more than everyone else, then you are emotionally disturbed. Can't you see that is a red flag? Why would anyone here try to convince you of a lie? Maybe everyone here isn't ALL right, but they can't be ALL wrong either! If, as I think... as your name suggest... away from the flames of hell at sub zero, you are rigidly frozen because your fear of hell keeps you from seeing valid points! Can't you see living in such a fearful state of mind is hell? How can ALL the scientist, ALL the history books, ALL the philosophers of mythology ALL be wrong and you're the only one right? Sure there are some great messages in the Bible, yet don't you think Buddha, Confucious, Suffis, scientists, Atheists, and others have inspiring messages also? If you were born in India... do you think Jesus would be your divine revelation? Would God have to throw you away in a burning pit for being born in India under the influences there? What kind of God is that? Please THINK for once out of fear of some stupid eternal hell!

 

You say Jesus is God. OK. Jesus said that everything he did, we too can do and even greater things. So please tell me how YOU can LITERALLY make an animal (snake) talk, get two of EVERY animal in the world on a boat and then after the GLOBAL flood, all the plants and everything will be dead, how is everything going to live? THINK out of fear! How can there be a burning pit with huge flames called hell yet it is still darkness and YOUR God is going to throw people in there forever who don't believe how you think they should? If you can at least show where you are willing to change your mind on a couple of things instead of having ALL the answers... YOU will benefit from it greatly. It starts with just a mustard seed of faith that it may be true... just THINK, make a rational choice instead of being stuck in a rigid place out of fear of the stupid concept of a literal hell, and then we can consider what you have to contribute from a place of peace and willingness to really seek truth too!

[thunderbolt]

Christianity sucked up enough of my life, and I am not giving this troll any more of it. I was willing to answer his questions, but his self-confessed motives shows that he doesn’t want to talk - he is clearly on the wrong message board.

 

So, bye bye zero.

 

[Antlerman]

[ Antlerman, how long was I here before some of these insightful messages finally had an effect on my thinking? (And I didn't even believe in a real place of hell outside one's mind!)

Think abnormal psycology. Zero is not a sincere person like you. Here's what's going to happen. He will respond to you because you paid him attention. Try to goad you into a fight for his amuzement, etc. He's not interested in anything we say. He is an Internet Troll. He does not view us as real people with real feelings. We are objects to him. I doubt you ever had any such impressions of us or any individual on the planet. Zero is a Troll.

[NotBlinded]

I don't get how archeology whether or not it exists proves Biblegod or any god for that matter. Mt. Olympus is a real life historical place in Greece, does this mean that Zeus is real? Mt Olympus

 

Everybody, fall and worship Zeus and his TWELVE other gods because by golly, OLYMPUS is a REAL PLACE.

Hi SAA,

 

It doesn't prove either way that god/s exist or doesn't. It is only a way to try to get Sub to understand that the book can't be taken literally. It is not unique to the myth of the flood or to many other themes. If Sub can have an aah-haa moment, he would be able to see that these similarities are actually pointing towards god, or the unknowable realm that transcends our physical existance. They all use these stories as pointers. The pointers are not to be taken for the object itself. Sub's problem, and many other literalists, is that they take the words to mean a literal occurance or place and then miss out on what the words are trying to do. They are trying to take the person to a different plane, mentally, than what is in this realm. The only way to do that is to use words that can only point to this plane. He is missing out on the entire spiritual meaning that the stories are attempting to provide.

 

But, it is hard to give up the reality of the pointers for the unknowns of what they are pointing to. The wonderful feeling of being spiritual lies in the notion that god/whatever is the Ultimate Mystery and can only be experienced by contemplation...not by 'knowing'. This is what Sub and others like him are missing when they claim knowledge of the Ultimate Mystery, for to claim knowledge of the mystery is to claim to understand it. Then the mystery is no longer a mystery, but knowledge. This is not possible...the Ultimate Mystery can never be known, IMO.

[Amanda]

Here's what's going to happen. He will respond to you because you paid him attention. Try to goad you into a fight for his amuzement, etc. He's not interested in anything we say. He is an Internet Troll. He does not view us as real people with real feelings. We are objects to him. I doubt you ever had any such impressions of us or any individual on the planet. Zero is a Troll.

 

Antlerman... I can see the writing on the wall, that's why I posted these last efforts to appeal to his sense of logic! A debating forum is only beneficial if each participant is willing to participate sincerely without thinking they are the only one with Truth. No one on this forum is GOD, and if they think they know more than EVERYONE else... yes, something is terribly wrong with their thinking and does not contribute positively to the group! If Sub Zero can not come back and admit that something someone else says may have merit... then I would certainly NOT respond to anything he has to say!

[NotBlinded]

 

 

The only problem here Fwee is that those punches should be going over his head and never making contact. Yes...that was mean of me.

[NotBlinded]

If your God can only be validated by “faith” then your god can be no more true™ or the only one than the god of any other religion. That’s what it is, your god is a matter of “faith” to you that cannot be validated, so to claim that he is true is not only dishonest, but it also causes you to invalidate your own holy book as being inerrant.

 

In other words subby, you have shot yourself in the foot … Thanks for making such a brilliant argument against your own god - I couldn't have done it better myself.

 

 

 

But His word, the Bible, can be verefied to a certain extent, that is what you are ignoring it seems like. Which is why I keep saying that what it can be verefied in leads me personally to believe what it says in all other areas. Faith is only needed when proof cannot be attained through the current level of the world's knowledge.

 

It's as if you think the Bible doesn't teach the idea of faith is believing in the unseen. And that one should not live by what the world has to say but to stay likewise faithful to His word as well as Himself.

The bible is a perfect example of something that is not true and true at the same time. It is not true that the fantastic claims of the bible happened in reality. But, it is 100% true on a philosophical/spiritual basis in many places. Don't mistake one form of truth for the other because you will invalidate the spiritual truths in the process. What is left of spirituality if you take it all literally? You are looking for physical truths in a spiritual book! When you view it in a spiritual manner, it doesn't matter if there are any physical truths or not...especially 2000 years later. These physical truths, such as location, mattered a whole lot to the people that created it because they were living during the time. The spiritual truths are timeless.

 

 

Exactly my point, following the world and not what the Bible says. What is this difference? How on earth can you understand the Bible when your base is on the world? Why must it have verify everything it states? Isn't that for the world to do?

Sub, please stop a moment and read what you said with this thought...you are understanding the bible with your base on the world! You are relating every story in the bible with a foundation in the world.

 

Noah's Ark - you claim happened in the world.

 

I am sure there are many more that you claim really happened. It is you Sub that is taking a spiritual book and making it profane. Leave it where it belongs...in the realm of faith. I know you don't see yourself doing this but it is my hope that you will take a look at what you are doing. It doesn't matter if these stories actually happened or not because it is a spiritual book that is telling stories to raise 'spiritualness' to a higher level.

 

Don't base your understanding on the world!

 

Only a fool absolutely believes in something that cannot be proven absolutely.

Do you have 100% faith in that statement?

[NotBlinded]

I don't get how archeology whether or not it exists proves Biblegod or any god for that matter. Mt. Olympus is a real life historical place in Greece, does this mean that Zeus is real? Mt Olympus

 

Everybody, fall and worship Zeus and his TWELVE other gods because by golly, OLYMPUS is a REAL PLACE.

Hi SAA,

 

It doesn't prove either way that god/s exist or doesn't. It is only a way to try to get Sub to understand that the book can't be taken literally.

 

Oops, that post of mine was directed at ZERO, I'm loving the archeology introduced here.. It was to show him that other myths refer to real places and that just because there may be history intertwined does not equal proof of god. We know the Egyptians had battles in real places...we also know that even though their war god gets a part in the glory that their war god is non-existent.

Yep!

[Ouroboros]

I have a verse I'd like Sub0 to explain:

 

Tit 1:12-13 KJVA One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. (13) This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

 

Paul wrote this, and supposedly Paul was well educated. But how come he totally missed the point of the contradiction that he's referring to? How come did he make a reference to this paradox?

 

To explain my question a bit more detailed:

 

First observation:

 

P1) A Cretian "prophet" made a claim

P2) Cretians are always lying

--------------------------------------------

C) Hence the Cretian Prophet was lying

(and the statement about the Cretians is false, and then the Prophet wasn't lying...)

 

 

Solution to this seemingly paradox (it's not a true paradox, but a contradiction) is that Cretians are just like any other people, they lie and they tell truths. They're not "alway liars".

 

My first question: How come God would let this stupid comment that's void of logic get into his Holy Word?

 

 

Second observation:

 

The philosopher that made the statement "Cretians always lie", Epimenides of Knossos (600 BC), didn't say this as a news flash or a true statement, but as an example of paradoxes and logic. It was not supposed to be taken literally, but as an educational expression.

 

Second question: Why did Paul, with his education in religion and philosophy, not know this?

 

 

Third observation:

 

Epimenides was not a "Prophet", and that's my third question, why do Paul misrepresent Epimenides so grossly? It smells racism to me. Epimenides was a philosopher, and not a religious zealot like Paul.

 

 

Fourth observation:

 

Epimenides said "Cretans, always liars", nothing else. He didn't say "evil beasts, slow bellies" etc, and that is my concluding question. Why does Paul add on his own opinions into someone else's words? It's a very disingenuous act on his part, and in essence Paul is the one lying, and he does it in written form for all of us to read 2000 years later. Why did he lie like that?

[NotBlinded]

It sounds like Paul didn't understand it himself. That is what I think happened on many occasions when the bible was written. If he did understand it, it wouldn't sound so hipocritical because he is doing exactly what he preaches against. He is talking about chruch leaders preaching what is not true.

 

Here is a little more to that verse from The Message Bible:

 

7 It's important that a church leader, responsible for the affairs in God's house, be looked up to - not pushy, not short-tempered, not a drunk, not a bully, not money-hungry. 8 He must welcome people, be helpful, wise, fair, reverent, have a good grip on himself, 9 and have a good grip on the Message, knowing how to use the truth to either spur people on in knowledge or stop them in their tracks if they oppose it. 10 For there are a lot of rebels out there, full of loose, confusing, and deceiving talk. Those who were brought up religious and ought to know better are the worst. 11 They've got to be shut up. They're disrupting entire families with their teaching, and all for the sake of a fast buck. 12 One of their own prophets said it best: The Cretans are liars from the womb, barking dogs, lazy bellies. 13 He certainly spoke the truth. Get on them right away. Stop that diseased talk of Jewish make-believe and made-up rules 14 so they can recover a robust faith. 15 Everything is clean to the clean-minded; nothing is clean to dirty-minded unbelievers. They leave their dirty fingerprints on every thought and act. 16 They say they know God, but their actions speak louder than their words. They're real creeps, disobedient good-for-nothings.

 

This is what happens when one speaks from their ego. Paul states that the church must welcome people and be wise and fair, but yet he isn't. He is angry.

 

It reads like he is just addressing the church leaders and not all of the populace???

[Ouroboros]

 

Paul sounds even more xenophobic in that translation! And how clear the contradiction comes out: "A Cretan said Cretans are liars." and next verse "He told the truth".

 

This particular part of the Bible was the one that opened my eyes to that the Bible is not infallible.

 

It could be read one more way too:

 

P1) The Bible say "Cretans are always lying"

P2) The Bible also say "A Creatan told the truth"

C1) If Cretans always lie, the Bible must be lying when it say a Cretan was telling the truth.

Or

C2) The Cretans are not always liars, and then the Bible is wrong in its statement that they always are.

 

This verse is the proof the Bible does contains lies.

[NotBlinded]

This verse is the proof the Bible does contains lies.

Yes and it should be proof that it wasn't god inspired, but man-made with man being capable of error. Not that it was intentional, because ignorance isn't intentional, but an error none-the-less.

[dibby]

This verse is the proof the Bible does contains lies.

[Ouroboros]

Nbbtb,

 

Correct. A religious person could still claim that the Bible was "inspired" by God, but not in the essence of "ghost hand", but just inspired like a flower or a sunset could inspire someone to write a poem. It's still man made, but with the drive or wish to see, or meet the supreme. It's the search for the extraordinary that drives people to write things like this.

 

I'd like to see how Sub0 explains that verse. Because if Sub0 agree to Paul there, he also agree to that Cretans are all liars and beasts. I hope for his sake s/he will never meet a real Cretan. It also would prove that Sub0 is a xenophobe, and not representing the "all loving God" that he claims.

 

 

*edit*

 

Whoopsie, Dibby, you lost something in your post!

[dibby]

This verse is the proof the Bible does contains lies.

Yes. Thank god for all the scholars who are sifting through the bible.

The roman church was not averse to a bit of "cut and paste", forgeries, etc to further their agenda.

[Guest sub_zer0]

Hey Amanda, e-mail me or go to my site, www.todayshistory.info , if you have any questions. It has become obvious to me you would like to know what the word of God contains.

 

My e-mail is in your PM.

 

Sub Zero, if you think you know more than everyone else, then you are emotionally disturbed. Can't you see that is a red flag? Why would anyone here try to convince you of a lie? Maybe everyone here isn't ALL right, but they can't be ALL wrong either! If, as I think... as your name suggest... away from the flames of hell at sub zero, you are rigidly frozen because your fear of hell keeps you from seeing valid points! Can't you see living in such a fearful state of mind is hell? How can ALL the scientist, ALL the history books, ALL the philosophers of mythology ALL be wrong and you're the only one right? Sure there are some great messages in the Bible, yet don't you think Buddha, Confucious, Suffis, scientists, Atheists, and others have inspiring messages also? If you were born in India... do you think Jesus would be your divine revelation? Would God have to throw you away in a burning pit for being born in India under the influences there? What kind of God is that? Please THINK for once out of fear of some stupid eternal hell!

 

I am not saying I AM RIGHT. I am saying Christ is right, nothing I have said is what I know it is what is said in the Bible and what Christ taught, etc.

 

You say Jesus is God. OK. Jesus said that everything he did, we too can do and even greater things.

 

When did Jesus say that we too can do even greater things?

 

So please tell me how YOU can LITERALLY make an animal (snake) talk, get two of EVERY animal in the world on a boat and then after the GLOBAL flood, all the plants and everything will be dead, how is everything going to live? THINK out of fear! How can there be a burning pit with huge flames called hell yet it is still darkness and YOUR God is going to throw people in there forever who don't believe how you think they should?

 

Here is the thing, people choose NOT to accept God on earth, when they die they go to a place without God which is Hell. God is only given them what they want.

[Ouroboros]

When did Jesus say that we too can do even greater things?

 

Joh 14:12 LITV Indeed, I tell you truly, the one believing into Me, the works which I do, that one shall do also, and greater than these he will do, because I go to My Father.

[Antlerman]

Antlerman... I can see the writing on the wall, that's why I posted these last efforts to appeal to his sense of logic!

Understood

[Ouroboros]

I saw mister SubZ popping in and disappear again, maybe to research the "traditional apologetic default answer" for this question, who knows...

 

Anyway, Serene, I understood your first statement, but the second got me confounded...

 

I am not saying I AM RIGHT. I am saying Christ is right, nothing I have said is what I know it is what is said in the Bible and what Christ taught, etc.

Ah, you're finally showing some improvements here!

 

If there's a chance that you're wrong, then there's a chance you're wrong about Christ being right too.