Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Bible Lies..


Guest SerenityNow

Recommended Posts

Guest SerenityNow

Many Christians (when I was one, I was included) claim that the Bible is the truth, teaches truth, defines truth, etc. But what of all the lies in the bible? I know of many but I'll start with just two. One I already posted in another thread about the definition of quickly, but now I'd like to post this one from Ezekiel............

 

Ezekiel 12:21-28 "21 The word of the LORD came to me: 22 "Son of man, what is this proverb you have in the land of Israel: 'The days go by and every vision comes to nothing'? 23 Say to them, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am going to put an end to this proverb, and they will no longer quote it in Israel.' Say to them, 'The days are near when every vision will be fulfilled. 24 For there will be no more false visions or flattering divinations among the people of Israel. 25 But I the LORD will speak what I will, and it shall be fulfilled without delay. For in your days, you rebellious house, I will fulfill whatever I say, declares the Sovereign LORD.' 26 The word of the LORD came to me: 27 "Son of man, the house of Israel is saying, 'The vision he sees is for many years from now, and he prophesies about the distant future.' 28 "Therefore say to them, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: None of my words will be delayed any longer; whatever I say will be fulfilled, declares the Sovereign LORD.'

 

My definition of "not delay" means that I will know longer make someone wait. What are some of your definitions of not delay? And before anyone tries to apologize away that this prophecy isn't regarding the future please take heed of verse 28 where it says "None of my words will be delayed any longer and whatever I say, will be fulfilled."..... Also, please note the highlighted words in vs. 25 "for in your days...." That sounds familiar, doesn't it? Go forth a few hundred years to Jesus, who is the way the truth and the life, where Jesus assures that the "day of the lord", will come while some who are standing there are alive. What pray tell is the definition of truth supposed to be? Isn't Jesus, God? If he is then he lied, there is no way around it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goodbye Jesus
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Amethyst

    11

  • Abiyoyo

    9

  • Mike D

    7

  • Mr. Neil

    4

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Any time christians argue that the bible is the inspired word of god, don't you worry, clearly you have the juice that proves this just can't be. Always a good time.

 

Welcome welcome.

 

I get annoyed by "interpretations" of the bible. Why can't they just say it? "Here's a funny verse, let me tell you MY OPINION about what that verse is REALLY trying to say."

 

Shut up already! They just can't stand people taking those words literally. Can't blame them. If you read the book and just take those words at face value, you'll run far far away from organized religion.

 

They won't get your money in their plate. Boo hoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any time christians argue that the bible is the inspired word of god, don't you worry, clearly you have the juice that proves this just can't be. Always a good time.

 

Welcome welcome.

 

I get annoyed by "interpretations" of the bible. Why can't they just say it? "Here's a funny verse, let me tell you MY OPINION about what that verse is REALLY trying to say."

 

Shut up already! They just can't stand people taking those words literally. Can't blame them. If you read the book and just take those words at face value, you'll run far far away from organized religion.

 

They won't get your money in their plate. Boo hoo.

 

I would agree that variable interpretations of the Bible do get annoying. However, the fact that different interpretations do exist seems to reflect the various degrees of perception that can be had by any individual. The bible, being a book, could hardly be exempted from the same human, cognitive limitations that would or could be witnessed with any other bit of literature.

 

Additionally, just because some group introduces a particular interpretation that may catch on with other groups even to the point that it may crowd out other interpretations, this does not mean that the interpretation favored even by a majority is by necessity, or obviously, the right one. It could be that a correct interpretation and any select text in the bible was displaced centuries ago and forgotten or ignored. To say that either the modern literalist interpretation supported by a majority must be the right one, and anyone with a different one is the wrong one, is in my view, a false dichtomy. It could be that everyone is wrong and the correct interpretation was lost centuries ago with the culture to which it belonged.

 

So, Am I saying something so simplistic as to mean that this should set a stage in which you should reconsider the bible? No. I'm simpy saying that what is popular, or what you were familiar with in the circles you ran with as Christian, can or COULD have been mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Am I saying something so simplistic as to mean that this should set a stage in which you should reconsider the bible?  No.  I'm simpy saying that what is popular, or what you were familiar with in the circles you ran with as Christian, can or COULD have been mistaken.

 

 

The christian circle I ran with (makes me sound like a biker or a gang member) stuck with the same old stories. All the "safe" stuff.

It was when I actually read the bible, that I began to suspect it was hooey.

 

And if the bible has been goofed through numerous bad translations and interpretations over the years, isn't every Christian sect "mistaken" in what they believe?

 

Or have all the "mistakes" been figured out in the last 8 years I've been away and we should all join hands, shout "glory!" and go back to religion?

 

Not likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many Christians (when I was one, I was included) claim that the Bible is the truth, teaches truth, defines truth, etc.

 

My fundy co-worker also makes that claim. He just hasn't quite figured out yet that just because something is written down in a book, doesn't mean it is true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that variable interpretations of the Bible do get annoying.  However, the fact that different interpretations do exist seems to reflect the various degrees of perception that can be had by any individual.  The bible, being a book, could hardly be exempted from the same human, cognitive limitations that would or could be witnessed with any other bit of literature.

 

Additionally, just because some group introduces a particular interpretation that may catch on with other groups even to the point that it may crowd out other interpretations, this does not mean that the interpretation favored even by a majority is by necessity, or obviously, the right one.  It could be that a correct interpretation and any select text in the bible was displaced centuries ago and forgotten or ignored. To say that either the modern literalist interpretation supported by a majority must be the right one, and anyone with a different one is the wrong one, is in my view, a false dichtomy.  It could be that everyone is wrong and the correct interpretation was lost centuries ago with the culture to which it belonged.

 

So, Am I saying something so simplistic as to mean that this should set a stage in which you should reconsider the bible?  No.  I'm simpy saying that what is popular, or what you were familiar with in the circles you ran with as Christian, can or COULD have been mistaken.

 

It's all good and I agree that different levels of interpretation can be applied to different parts of the scripture. Some parts are considered litteral and some considered allegorical, like Moby Dick.

 

But doesn't that also mean that I can take the standpoint that the Bible is all fiction, myths and legends, and that would be just another valid interpretation, without having to be questioned or criticized by a fundamentalist? (I'm not saying you're one of them)

 

So the whole Bible is an allegory, nothing is historical and that's totally valid standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the whole Bible is an allegory, nothing is historical and that's totally valid standpoint.

 

That's one of the major standpoints I enforce. There's nary a modern religion that doesn't think that at least one portion of the Bible is factual.

 

When the truth is that its either allegorical, or the parts that are true, were interpolated from other events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many Christians (when I was one, I was included) claim that the Bible is the truth, teaches truth, defines truth, etc. But what of all the lies in the bible?  I know of many but I'll start with just two.  One I already posted in another thread about the definition of quickly, but now I'd like to post this one from Ezekiel............

 

Ezekiel 12:21-28 "21 The word of the LORD came to me: 22 "Son of man, what is this proverb you have in the land of Israel: 'The days go by and every vision comes to nothing'? 23 Say to them, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: I am going to put an end to this proverb, and they will no longer quote it in Israel.' Say to them, 'The days are near when every vision will be fulfilled. 24 For there will be no more false visions or flattering divinations among the people of Israel. 25 But I the LORD will speak what I will, and it shall be fulfilled without delay. For in your days, you rebellious house, I will fulfill whatever I say, declares the Sovereign LORD.'  26 The word of the LORD came to me: 27 "Son of man, the house of Israel is saying, 'The vision he sees is for many years from now, and he prophesies about the distant future.' 28 "Therefore say to them, 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: None of my words will be delayed any longer; whatever I say will be fulfilled, declares the Sovereign LORD.'

 

My definition of "not delay" means that I will know longer make someone wait. What are some of your definitions of not delay?  And before anyone tries to apologize away that this prophecy isn't regarding the future please take heed of verse 28 where it says "None of my words will be delayed any longer and whatever I say, will be fulfilled.".....  Also, please note the highlighted words in vs. 25 "for in your days...."  That sounds familiar, doesn't it?  Go forth a few hundred years to Jesus, who is the way the truth and the life, where Jesus assures that the "day of the lord", will come while some who are standing there are alive.  What pray tell is the definition of truth supposed to be?  Isn't Jesus, God? If he is then he lied, there is no way around it.

 

Hopefully, the inclination to receive some insight on the confusion of this text is the same to the disagreement. Jesus said that they would not taste death till they saw the Son of Man coming in His kingdom. I know there are many "contradiction" geared sites that depict the Bible. Lets examine the other side of this passage and the topic. The basic contardiction here is that God said verse 28 where it says "None of my words will be delayed any longer and whatever I say, will be fulfilled, and the arguement is that Jesus said that His disciples would see the Last Days, or the Kingdom of God, or the Coming of Christ. The basic means of this topic was that Jesus/ God was a liar? The Words given to Ezekiel were given for that time, of course regarding the captivity of the Children of Israel. The means of the Words were mostly in regard to the many false prophets in that time that were smoothsaying things to give remaining Israe/Judah hope. Jesus possibly showed the Kingdom of God to the Disciples(argued)(Matt13.11,LK8.10), in His transfiguring on the mount,(Mtt17, Mrk9, Lk9,). Also, Jesus told His disciples of the mystery of the Kingdom of God, and the ascention into heaven. Also, it says in Revelations that all will see when the Son of Man comes. My question is, Did Jesus mean that the disciples would see the Coming of the Son of Man at that time?No, like the stated topic says if He did then He would have been a liar. Jesus said that Abraham saw his day and rejoiced(Jhn 8.56). So would not the disciples, most being killed for His word, also see the Coming of the Son of Man?This in fact preserves the first notion by God, and His word. The second is the Bibles(physical) standards. The physical Bible has been mocked, depicted, trambled, burned, tryed to been kept in leaders hands only, misguided, been sought to destroy, and unbelieved and considered a myth by many. Yet, through all those times(dating back to Jesus) this book has been preserved and made manifest to homes and nations in most languages everwhere. This document has over 1400 original text to weigh its authinticity, and structure. This document is the most popular book in the world, and one of the hardest books to literally believe in as historical evidence or existence. Gladly though, this Book is not meant to be a litteral work of art but rather a work that has the divine essence of God breathed upon it.(Define inspired, then by Gods influence) Did not Jesus mention many times in the Gospels of, those that hear let them hear, or the purpose of the parables explained to the disciples. Would it not make sense for the nonlitteral guide to Christians to make sense to those who believe, and hope for the applying guide of Gods word to them, rather than a mere literalist interpretation. Not exactly, God said in Hebrews, that the Word of God is like a two edged sword, piercing the souls and hearts, joints and marrows, etc..The Word is the Sword that Jesus brought. His saving of the world He also brought for all nations. In that, one may read the Bible literally, for research(Martin Luther) and still be "softened to Its heed". Anyhow, this is my take on the topic and how it is perceived and justified in a believers eye, by someone that doesnt read the Bible literally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you talking about?

 

You're pretty much just twisting the meaning of what it's saying to fit your own sordid belief system. You're clinging to straws. Jesus is not coming, YoYo. He may or may not have existed.

 

If he did exist, then he's not coming because he said he would come back before the people he's spoken to have died, and they're dead.

 

If he doesn't exist, then he's not coming for obvious reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YoYo... For crying out loud! Give us a fucking break, wouldya? It's painful to read your posts and think that you actually expect to be taken seriously.

 

And did you suddenly forget how to use the return key? Break your posts up into paragraphs from now on! Jeez!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YoYo... For crying out loud!  Give us a fucking break, wouldya?  It's painful to read your posts and think that you actually expect to be taken seriously.

 

And did you suddenly forget how to use the return key?  Break your posts up into paragraphs from now on!  Jeez!

post-38-1116558221.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully, the inclination to receive The physical Bible has been mocked, depicted, trambled, burned, tryed to been kept in leaders hands only, misguided, been sought to destroy, and unbelieved and considered a myth by many. Yet, through all those times(dating back to Jesus) this book has been preserved and made manifest to homes and nations in most languages everwhere. This document has over 1400 original text to weigh its authinticity, and structure. This document is the most popular book in the world, and one of the hardest books to literally believe in as historical evidence or existence...

 

Just because something is very popular doesn't necessarily mean it is true. Also, just because something has the backing of church authorities doesn't mean it is true. They backed the idea that the planets revolved around the earth instead of the sun; obviously, that wasn't true. Or are you a flat-earther as well?

 

Harry Potter is popular as well. Does that mean that it should become the new religion? Of course not.

 

Lord of the Rings is also popular. Does that mean we should make it our new religion? I don't think so.

 

If drinking poison-laced koolaid was popular because some priest said that God told him to do so, would you do it? I would hope not.

 

That's not a very good argument in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so I need a bible college degree to understand this????  Throughout the ENTIRE bible quickly means quickly (make haste, fast, right now, soon,etc.) but yet when we see quickly in these scriptures it doesn't mean quickly?  Now it's allegorical?  Give me a freakin' break.
This reminds me of a Jason Gastrich harmonization. In fact, here's an example of Jason Gastrich trying to make "quickly" not mean "quickly" when in reference to Jesus being driven out into the wilderness. It astounds me to see the absurdity to which Christians will go in order to maintain their beliefs, even as far as to say that the words on the page don't literally mean what they say.

 

But to back up what Thankful is saying, the Greek word in each of those passes is "tachu", and tachu means immediately, quickly, and without delay. Well, pardon me for saying this but 2000 years is a long period of time to be define as "immediately". Clearly this isn't true, and I'm floored every day that there are Christians who will look at verses like these and not immediately question their own faith.

 

Ref.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev022.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not as familiar with that particular book, but that certainly seems to be the case. God is speaking of something that is to happen forthwith, and yet nothing happens.

 

In fact, the version I'm reading doesn't just say "come quickly". It translates the verse as saying that the great day of the Lord "hasteth greatly", which is to say extremely quickly.

 

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Zep/Zep001.html

 

 

I'm not a Bible scholar, but lexicons break things down in a way that make these things demonstratable to even the most novice of layperson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Bible scholar, but lexicons break things down in a way that make these things demonstratable to even the most novice of layperson.

Wonder what Jason's excuse is then...

 

 

 

Apart from he's a twit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh he doesn't even try. If I were to head over to Free.Christians and bring this to his attention, he would either killfile me or accuse me of being anti-Christian (and therefore attacking Jason). Heck, he'd probably do both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because something is very popular doesn't necessarily mean it is true. Also, just because something has the backing of church authorities doesn't mean it is true. They backed the idea that the planets revolved around the earth instead of the sun; obviously, that wasn't true. Or are you a flat-earther as well?

 

Harry Potter is popular as well. Does that mean that it should become the new religion? Of course not.

 

Lord of the Rings is also popular. Does that mean we should make it our new religion? I don't think so.

 

If drinking poison-laced koolaid was popular because some priest said that God told him to do so, would you do it? I would hope not.

 

That's not a very good argument in my book.

 

Fuck you all. I want to be COOL!

 

:lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=thankful,May 20 2005

 

Zephaniah 1:14 The great day of the LORD is near---

near and coming quickly. Listen! The cry on the day of the LORD will be bitter, the shouting of the warrior there*****The whole book of Zephaniah is regarding the end times, not just a "time period" so "that was for a specific group of people of that time" does not fly.  These words are supposedly spoken by God.  God gave very SPECIFIC instructions on how to identify false prophets this prophecy nor the onces below ever happened at said time.  This proves the Bible is full of false prophecies and cannot be trusted as the word of the Almighty.  ****

 

Read Zephaniah 1.1 before any assumptions of the text are inclined. This was a prophecy in the days of Josiah, son of Amon, king of Judah. It was intended for that precept of time, and meant to be quickly. The nation of Israel was soon taken captive by Babylon.

 

 

Revelation 22:7 "And behold, I am coming quickly.  Blessed is he who heeds the words of the prophecy of this book."

 

Revelation 22:12"Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done

 

Revelation 22:20 " 20He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly " Amen Come, Lord Jesus.

 

OK, fourteen generations later we have this Book of Revelations of John. These are the "detailed descriptions of the end times, and warnings. Looking back at Jesus's description of the end times, we see more details. The "quickly" form of this text used in Revelations is referring to the quickness in the time of that day.

 

Jesus in the Gospels described in detail what things would come to pass before all the end day, and explained by example the quickness that that day would come upon from mans mindset. In other words, Jesus was basically saying that when that day comes it will be like lightning, quick, flash, then the great tribulation will progress.

Okay, so I need a bible college degree to understand this????  Throughout the ENTIRE bible quickly means quickly (make haste, fast, right now, soon,etc.) but yet when we see quickly in these scriptures it doesn't mean quickly?  Now it's allegorical?  Give me a freakin' break.  IMHO that line of reasoning makes no sense.  How does one justify their beliefs if they don't take the bible literally with exception of where they see fit?

 

No, a Bible degree is not needed. As said earlier, quickly in Revelations and in the Gospels are meant by when that "day" is here it will come quickly. I can literalize certain parts of the Bible in context because I read the it as a story. Obviously, in Zephaniah, this was directly based upon Israels rebellion toward God, and a good example of OT "end day", Christ prophecies is in the Book of Isaiah.

 

There are many obvious allegories in the bible, parables being one, but these are not allegorical words.  I take the bible literally where obviously literal and allegorical where obviously allegorical.  The Bible is supposedly, God breathed.  Many say that Jesus saying to cut off a sinful body part is allegorical, and I always thought so too.  That is until I read the Old Testament Laws. God has no problem ordering the chopping off of a woman's hand for touching a man's privates if trying to help her hubby out in a fight.  "Cut her hand off with no pity.  Show her NO mercy." 

 

I would hope that God would not condemn His people in such a way. Did David cut off his arm?Did Jesus cut off Mary Magdalene's hand? The whole point of the coming of Jesus has not been taken in consideration here. The literal anaylisis of these verses provide the whole point of why literal reading and depiction is not helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thankful
Thank goodness, I came out of the lie before it messed with my mind anymore.  Jesus lied in Revelations, making "quickly" allegorical is an apologists tactic to keep people entrapped.  No one gave me those views on the Bible, it came from reading it.  Many fundamentalist take literally that homosexuality is a sin but yet take allegorical the command not to watch anything "evil".  Picking and choosing is so common, it always has been, always will be.  I posed a similiar question in another category and I'll post a similiar one here too....

 

Well, unfortuniately, the message was misinterpreted. Hope some illustration on this has helped. I read this book as "reading" it as well, and when formed with the common movement of God in the Bible, the precept and fashion is self explanable.

 

Homosexuality, is talked about in the Law of Moses. Although, if a Homosexual person has Jesus in there heart and meditates, prays, gets batized in water and by the Holy Sprirt; then hes a Christian. I would suspect that if this were the case, then alot of "pressure" and "conviction" of the lifestyle would follow. I will say that God ordained man to be with woman, and even made the other lifestyle unlawful in His moral laws, but on that point God still loves and hopes for correctness from that person.

 

On the other side of the coin though, Jesus chastised the Jews for there "cherishing" of the laws and the stubborness toward life in general. In other words, God will hold people accountable for other types of "sin" yet love them more than one could ever phathom, so the same with this lifestyle. Could not a person with this "lifestyle" that wants to be a Christian take a life of abstunance?This is a possible answer.

 

People have all kinds of horrible and just plain human desires running through their heads. The key to victory is not acting on them and clearing your thoughts. God did say in Genesis that sin lies at our door waiting to rule over us, but we should overcome it.

 

 

If you were the ONLY adult around and a child was in danger of being hit by a car and you say, "Quickly!  Get out of the road!"  Which quickly do you hope they would know.....  the normal dictionary, everyday life meaning of quickly, or the definition God/Jesus give in the above scriptures?

 

LOL. lets hope they read the verses with a storyand meaning behind it. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fuck you all. I want to be COOL!

 

There's nothing wrong with being cool. Brainwashed, however...

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Amethyst,May 20 2005  Just because something is very popular doesn't necessarily mean it is true.  Also, just because something has the backing of church authorities doesn't mean it is true.  They backed the idea that the planets revolved around the earth instead of the sun; obviously, that wasn't true.  Or are you a flat-earther as well?

 

Harry Potter is popular as well.  Does that mean that it should become the new religion?  Of course not. 

 

Lord of the Rings is also popular.  Does that mean we should make it our new religion?  I don't think so.

 

(YoYo @ May 19 2005, 09:43 PM)The physical Bible has been mocked, depicted, trambled, burned, tryed to been kept in leaders hands only, misguided, been sought to destroy, and unbelieved and considered a myth by many.

 

The suggestion that this statement was derived from the local church club is false. These are accurate and historical teachings even in the unbeliever groups.

 

 

Amethyst,May 20 2005 If drinking poison-laced koolaid was popular because some priest said that God told him to do so, would you do it?  I would hope not.

 

That's not a very good argument in my book.

 

 

(YoYo @ May 19 2005, 09:43 PM)

Yet, through all those times(dating back to Jesus) this book has been preserved and made manifest to homes and nations in most languages everwhere. This document has over 1400 original text to weigh its authinticity, and structure. This document is the most popular book in the world, and one of the hardest books to literally believe in as historical evidence or existence...

 

How is accurate historical truths of the Christian religion, regarding the facts not weighable "in your book". Someone that seeks the truth in whole will receive all possible truths and deny the untruthful and accept the truthful. The bigger question is, What defines someones ability to obtain truth?How does the specific ability of someone define the interpretation of that truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot believe everything that is written down, though. Just because something is written down, doesn't make it true. You are assuming it's true because you have been told that. But how do you know the people who told you that haven't also been brainwashed?

 

I obtain truth by observation and by evidence. There is no evidence that the Bible is true. All we have is writing, which we cannot assume is a real historical record just because someone wrote it down, even because they mention real places in it, and possibly signed their name to it.

 

The Spider-Man comic books mention New York. We all know New York exists. Does this mean the characters are real? Unfortunately, not. The Superman comic books mention real places, too. Does that mean Superman is real? No, even though we need someone like him more than ever these days.

 

If I write a story and it gets published and someone puts it in a time capsule, and 500 years later when there is a completely different civilization on Earth someone digs it up and starts a cult around it, does that make that story true? No, of course not.

 

The Bible is fiction, plain and simple. Why can you not see that? Pick up any good fantasy novel from the bookstore -- the Belgariad from David Eddings, for example. He created an entire pantheon of gods and goddesses for his story. They are quite real as characters. Does that make them real in our world? Of course not. If you can tell the difference between that -- or behind some pagan myth -- and reality, why can't you see that the Bible is the exact same thing? It's a myth that was plagiarized from other myths.

 

The power of myth and storytelling in human society is very real. The popularity of movies like Star Wars prove that. But they are still just myths, as much as we might want them to be real.

 

Just because someone tells you something is true doesn't automatically make it true, even if that person believes it to be true. Open your eyes from all the brainwashing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You cannot believe everything that is written down, though.  Just because something is written down, doesn't make it true.  You are assuming it's true because you have been told that.  But how do you know the people who told you that haven't also been brainwashed?

 

Really, Do you know me in that way? If you really knew my situations and dealings regarding the church and family, that probualy wouldnt have been mentioned.

 

I obtain truth by observation and by evidence.  There is no evidence that the Bible is true.  All we have is writing, which we cannot assume is a real historical record just because someone wrote it down, even because they mention real places in it, and possibly signed their name to it. 

 

What is the definition of true? Is there evidence to prove the Bible untrue?

The writting in the Bible is the inspired direct Word of God upon the people(of many authors, and many years apart) to write.

 

The Spider-Man comic books mention New York.  We all know New York exists.  Does this mean the characters are real?  Unfortunately, not.  The Superman comic books mention real places, too.  Does that mean Superman is real?  No, even though we need someone like him more than ever these days.

 

Oh boy?Well, you got me, I have come to my senses :twitch:

 

If I write a story and it gets published and someone puts it in a time capsule, and 500 years later when there is a completely different civilization on Earth someone digs it up and starts a cult around it, does that make that story true?  No, of course not.

 

Well, that depends on if were still here LOL,. If there are 40-60 authors that wrote about the exact same thing in the same context in the same manner. They also would have to have wrote this same context in a prior 500 year before/after period that agrees with yours. Then, you would have to be able to identify people that have experienced the"writtings" contents and had faith and miracles in their own life based around the writtings about 2000 years later .

 

The Bible is fiction, plain and simple.  Why can you not see that?  Pick up any good fantasy novel from the bookstore -- the Belgariad from David Eddings, for example.  He created an entire pantheon of gods and goddesses for his story.  They are quite real as characters.  Does that make them real in our world?  Of course not.  If you can tell the difference between that -- or behind some pagan myth -- and reality, why can't you see that the Bible is the exact same thing?  It's a myth that was plagiarized from other myths. 

 

Now, the real question is who was the informing influence by your "veiw". Lets just assume that there are ample "evidences"(not scripture variations) that back this "myth". Is not the most evidental thing that could take place is over 52 generations of believers that called out to God and were answered.

 

Even simplifing this to the last generation of believers that have called Gods name and things happen.

Are all these people crazy?

 

 

Just because someone tells you something is true doesn't automatically make it true, even if that person believes it to be true.  Open your eyes from all the brainwashing.

 

Actually, I have been more confronted to be the brainwasher than the brainwashee. :eek: No brainwashing going on here other than a 4000 year old book that reveals life to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hope that God would not condemn His people in such a way. Did David cut off his arm?Did Jesus cut off Mary Magdalene's hand? The whole point of the coming of Jesus has not been taken in consideration here. The literal anaylisis of these verses provide the whole point of why literal reading and depiction is not helpful.

 

So if you accept that the Bible is not factual, and indeed allegory, then how can you say its reasonable to follow its precepts in a literal fashion?

 

People have all kinds of horrible and just plain human desires running through their heads. The key to victory is not acting on them and clearing your thoughts. God did say in Genesis that sin lies at our door waiting to rule over us, but we should overcome it.

 

If you accept this as true, then you are essentially accepting that man is inherently evil. Because if human desire always leads us to sin, then we are always wanting to embrace evil in our heart & soul. How does that reconcile that God would create a creature that is inherently evil?

 

What is the definition of true? Is there evidence to prove the Bible untrue?

The writting in the Bible is the inspired direct Word of God upon the people(of many authors, and many years apart) to write.

 

Oh boy, how many times are we going to have to repeat this before its accepted. Yes, there is an extensive amount of evidence showing that the Bible was written by man, adapted by man, and corrupted by man.

 

This brings us back to another base issue. How can you expect men, to maintain the original Bible when, as you yourself said, it has been translated and re-translated, adapted & debated over as to which books to include over 300+ years (for the New Testament alone), and changed to whomever is working with it, over a 1,000 odd times?

 

That aside. If you really did your research, you would find out that all of the Biblical stories existed before the Bible was even concieved. And that these stories used in the Bible were all plagiarized from older religious mythos (in order to get other pagan religions to be bent to Christianity's growing power).

 

If you want sources, I'd be more than happy to forward them to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.