The Bible is true?

[PhanPhavorite]

I had someone trying to defend that the Bible is 100% accurate. I found this person did not know what they were talking about. It infuriates me to think that people believe everything that the Bible says.
Does anyone else agree?

[inbloom]

this was discussed in another topic. i agree, it's stupid to think that people would just so blindly believe in something so much, especially when they history of the book is kinda shaky.

[mynameiskc]

in certain respects it's handy for archeological mapping. i enjoy reading the biblical archeology review and the way they put ancient locations within the context of the bible. i like to compare these with other archeology magazines covering the same topic. though it's been a while, i've been too broke for a subscription recently.

[campbell34]

The Bible was inspired by God and is a 100% accurate. But you guys wouldn't know anything about this; because your too busy making negative comments about the Bible without any knowledge of it.

What do you know about the prophetic proof, the archaelogical proof, the scientifical accuracy in the Bible??


Proof of the Bible...

http://r-campbell34.tripod.com/proof

[Epiphany]

*Looks at Bible, reads about all the prophecies, sees the ones that have happend, sees the ones that are happening now, and knows the ones that have not yet come to pass*


Contrary to popular belief, Christians don't just blindly put faith into a book. They read the Bible and they feel the presence of God. They see the prophecies being fulfilled. That is why I find the statement about blind faith so amusing. Christians see their prayers being answered, they see miracles being performed in their lives. They talk to God, and God answers. If nothing ever happend, do you think people would continue to believe? If God's promises weren't fulfilled, then we wouldn't have Christians today.

[seamonster66]

I totally agree with you, i think some things are based on real events, but to actually believe adam made eve with a rib is moronic.

[campbell34]

I totally agree with you, i think some things are based on real events, but to actually believe adam made eve with a rib is moronic.
-God has never changed. The same God that is able to answer our prayers was the same God that created the universe and thus Adam and Eve. You look at God like He is human. Like He is confined to human capabilities. But in reality God is way above our abilities.

[mynameiskc]

I totally agree with you, i think some things are based on real events, but to actually believe adam made eve with a rib is moronic.
considering this story from a literary angle, i think it's sweet and pretty deep. god wants men and women to be companions dependent upon one another. how better to do this than to create them from one body? then, the choice of the rib is pretty nice touch, because it's from the region that protects his heart. pretty nice. i like it. do i buy it? not really.

[seamonster66]

And KC, I think yoiu have the right idea, stories with symbolism and morality that aren't really SUPPOSED to be taken literally.



Quote: The same God that is able to answer our prayers was the same God that created the universe and thus Adam and Eve


hahahahashahahaha

[freakwentflyer]

Good luck! As you can see from some of these posts, hard core bible beaters will keep you going in circles with twisted logic.

Try to take an intellectual walk down their path and you just find your shoes covered in dogma.
The stories of the bible are based on actual events so they see those connections as "proof".
All of the prophecies are inspired by events that continually happen through history, or are self fulfilling prophecies. So, nothing earth shattering in them.
I use to know the bible well, years ago. As at teen I planned to be a preacher.

[JohnnyX]

First you must understand how it was written...Is it the same book as it was when it was written? I say no. It was originally written in Hebrew and Greek. Since both of these societies relied on oral tradition, most of the stories were orally handed down and we know what happens there. Then it was rewritten and edited by the Vatican, OT and NT that is...the OT in Judaism pretty much hasnt changed. The Pope only wanted certain things in the final version of the BOOK so he threw many of the books out...and never to be seen again (why is this? I wonder). Pope Pious XIII I think it was. THEN it was adopted by the protestants and edited AGAIN! And since then has been rewritten and translated and edited a million times over. So if someone is trying to convince me that the BOOK is straight from the horses mouth, so to say, then they better do some detailed research cuz just telling me that you are right and I am wrong and will go to hell just isnt gonna cut it over here pal!

[campbell34]

JohnnyX,

Have you ever heard of the dead sea scrolls??

[seamonster66]

Just because fables are old does not make them inherently true. the story of Noah dates back to Egyptian times, Hammerabi's tale, does that make it any more likely to be true.....no.

When it comes down to it, the only way to believe that the stories are absolutely true is on faith.

I would like a creationist to explain why geologic time doesn't match up to the bibles timeline? Which one should I believe, one based on science, or one based on far fetched rather primitive stories, edited and re-edited for political purposes.


Each religion thinks there bible, or koran, or whatever else is absolutely true too. Guess what, only 1 can be correct, and its overwhelmingly likely that none are!

[LuciferSam]

First you must understand how it was written...Is it the same book as it was when it was written? I say no. It was originally written in Hebrew and Greek. Since both of these societies relied on oral tradition, most of the stories were orally handed down and we know what happens there. Then it was rewritten and edited by the Vatican, OT and NT that is...the OT in Judaism pretty much hasnt changed. The Pope only wanted certain things in the final version of the BOOK so he threw many of the books out...and never to be seen again (why is this? I wonder). Pope Pious XIII I think it was. THEN it was adopted by the protestants and edited AGAIN! And since then has been rewritten and translated and edited a million times over. So if someone is trying to convince me that the BOOK is straight from the horses mouth, so to say, then they better do some detailed research cuz just telling me that you are right and I am wrong and will go to hell just isnt gonna cut it over here pal! Precisely what I was getting at in a similar thread! The Bible, along with the religion tied to it, has gone through many a revision in its long history. The Old Testament was essentially taken from the Jews' scriptures, obviously, and the New Testament was compiled of scriptures hand-picked by the mainstream Church leaders, at the time they used it to counter their main competition, the Gnostic Christians (whom the Church was quick to stomp out of existance when it finally acquired power in the Roman Empire).

Even if any of the statistics campbell presents are true, they are still only circumstantial, and while they point to the very probable fact that many Bible stories are historically based, they do not prove the presumptuous idea that the Bible is completely infallible and complete fact, especially given the revisionist tendencies of Church history.

[JohnnyX]

Yes Ive heard of the DEAD SEA SCROLLS....but I also know that the books that were ousted from the vatican soon after the invention of the press when the pope decided that the bible was to be printed and distributed. After the disclusion of the lost books they were never to be seen again and their location has been kept a secret by the vatican. Why would these books be so secret? What didn't he want us to read? The bible was written by MEN not GOD!!!!! This is a fact. Not only that now the WORD OF GOD is written by a machine!!!! That is soooooooo HOLY! It is a book written by men who make mistakes so I take from it what I feel is useful to help me be a better person and to understand the culture of Hebrews and their Folklore and a picture of Palestine (Yes, Palestine) under the control of the Roman Empire. Not to mention the teachings of a very enlightened human being that I admire very much.

[JohnnyX]

"The Freedom of the Press belongs to those who own one."
-A.J. Liebling

[mynameiskc]

i think the bible has a very basic universality. there's carnality, brutality, morality and mythology. brilliant stuff that speaks to the very humanity of us all. our temptations, our fears, our desires and our needs. even a non-christian should read it, if only to understand where much of our western civilization's social standards come from. i think the bible is a brilliant collection of all sorts of wisdom and history of a cultural (in the end, our own culture). has anyone noticed that if you look at the 10 commandments from a cold, sensible viewpoint, following those basic rules makes for a very peaceful and satisfying life? it's true. the more i worked to follow those basic rules, the happier and more pleasant my life has become, once i got past the pride and not wanting to be told what to do.

[freakwentflyer]

Very true KC.

And I would add to those 10 commandment the Jesus quote (something he picked up from far eastern traders),- "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

It's sad that Christians focus on the dogma. "Jesus died for your sins", "without accecpting Jesus as your saviour, you'll burn in hell" and all that insaine religious crap, instead of focusing on the real beauty of the life and teachings of Jesus as a way of living and treating others. I especially like the idea of the "holy ghost" living within us not so much as a "fact" but as a philosophy to explain a feeling of oneness with others. And I like the idea of baptism as a physical act to highten the symbolism of washing away ones guilt or sins of the past, in a way of self forgiveness.
I personally think that the real Jesus, didn't say "I am the way and the light". My guess is he was referring to the "holy spirit" within him. Feeling a oneness with all life, seems to be the best way of feeling a connection with the source of all life.
Throw away the "religion" and there is something for everyone in the bible.
Although you're right, there is much to learn about our history from the "religion" aspect as well.

[campbell34]

Yes Ive heard of the DEAD SEA SCROLLS....but I also know that the books that were ousted from the vatican soon after the invention of the press when the pope decided that the bible was to be printed and distributed. After the disclusion of the lost books they were never to be seen again and their location has been kept a secret by the vatican. Why would these books be so secret? What didn't he want us to read? The bible was written by MEN not GOD!!!!! This is a fact. Not only that now the WORD OF GOD is written by a machine!!!! That is soooooooo HOLY! It is a book written by men who make mistakes so I take from it what I feel is useful to help me be a better person and to understand the culture of Hebrews and their Folklore and a picture of Palestine (Yes, Palestine) under the control of the Roman Empire. Not to mention the teachings of a very enlightened human being that I admire very much.
-Can you be a little bit more specific??

What books are you talking about.... where did you get the reference of these books.... and where can i get the reference of these books?

Usually when i here this stuff it almost always turns out bogus. If it is the books that I am thinking of then they are occultic in nature.

[JohnnyX]

-Can you be a little bit more specific??

What books are you talking about.... where did you get the reference of these books.... and where can i get the reference of these books?

Usually when i here this stuff it almost always turns out bogus. If it is the books that I am thinking of then they are occultic in nature.
First...exactly what is your definition of occult? Is anything that is not written by and for christians occult? I know, according to christians, any other religion is bogus. Any information I give to you will be bogus so what's the point but there are some good reads here...
http://www.apologeticsinfo.org/papers/trustworthinessofthebible.html
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bibleorigins.html
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/batbible.html

So I suppose that all of these theologans, authors, priests and rabbis are all bogus. But why are you asking me? You have a computer do the research yourself if you are allowed to even question what you are told by the church.

[campbell34]

First...exactly what is your definition of occult? Is anything that is not written by and for christians occult? I know, according to christians, any other religion is bogus. Any information I give to you will be bogus so what's the point but there are some good reads here...
http://www.apologeticsinfo.org/papers/trustworthinessofthebible.html
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bibleorigins.html
http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/batbible.html

So I suppose that all of these theologans, authors, priests and rabbis are all bogus. But why are you asking me? You have a computer do the research yourself if you are allowed to even question what you are told by the church.


I started to read a little of the Evolution of the Bible, which was one source you gave me, it was published in 1888 and it's author was Bronson C.Keeler. I got to tell you, he might of convince people the bible was not true back in 1888, but this excuse for serious study sure would get an F today. It first starts out telling us that the Old Testament was the work of astrologers. I know the old testament, and there is no mention of astrology. The first five books were written by Moses.

The new testament was written as an allegory on the annual apparent motion of the Sun, Moon and Stars, which was the basis of Sun worship, which looked upon the Sun as the visible representative of the great creative, hence the Sun of God. You have got to kidding me, this person is demented, there is no other explanation for making these statements, outside of being drunk out of his mind. I'm thinking this has got to be a joke, you can't base your spiritual conclusions on these kinds of writings.

"I have given also another story pictured in the old testament of Uranus as the Son of the Sun God, which must not be confounded with the above."-Bronson C.Keeler

I got news for you, Uranus is not mentioned in the old testament or the new testament, because William Herschel discovered it in 1781, long after the bible was written. I can't wait to read the other secret texts.

The new testament was written to show what should be rather than what was, or as a beacon light to lead man on to a better life. What is this guy talking about? What should be, is what happened. I give up, I can only deal with insanity for short periods of time. If you had been living back in 1888, this guy would of been trying to sell you a bottle of snake oil, claiming it cured everything from sore feet to cancer. Hope he's not the one your looking to for spiritual truth.

[Epiphany]

Very true KC.

And I would add to those 10 commandment the Jesus quote (something he picked up from far eastern traders),- "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

It's sad that Christians focus on the dogma. "Jesus died for your sins", "without accecpting Jesus as your saviour, you'll burn in hell" and all that insaine religious crap, instead of focusing on the real beauty of the life and teachings of Jesus as a way of living and treating others.
True Christians focus on both. We are Christians first and foremost because we know that Jesus died for our sins. But if we aren't practicing how Jesus said that we must treat one another, then what is the point? Christianity has to be a well roundness of faith, and love for our fellow man.



I especially like the idea of the "holy ghost" living within us not so much as a "fact" but as a philosophy to explain a feeling of oneness with others. And I like the idea of baptism as a physical act to highten the symbolism of washing away ones guilt or sins of the past, in a way of self forgiveness. I personally think that the real Jesus, didn't say "I am the way and the light". My guess is he was referring to the "holy spirit" within him. Feeling a oneness with all life, seems to be the best way of feeling a connection with the source of all life.
God fill three offices. Much in this way.... say you are married with children. You are:
A. The son of your parents
B. A husband
c. A father

God is God - the creator of life. Jesus is God coming down to earth in flesh form. The holy spirit is the spirit of God that is given to live in our hearts.

[Real American]

I like apologetics. It's an in depth study into my faith. I think this here will sum it up for all of you if you will actualy read it.


There is no objective evidence that the biblical text has been tampered with by the Jews or the early Church. There is no manuscript evidence, no archaeological evidence, no eyewitness--or otherwise--testimony, no support from the writings of the early Church, nor any evidence from the study of textual criticism to substantiate witches' or other occultist's or critics subjectively based claims of a tampered Bible.

On the other hand, there is overwhelming objective evidence to support the conclusion that the biblical text was not tampered with by the early Church, but has been faithfully transmitted down through the centuries to us today and is indeed a reliable historical document of the first order.

The problem here is not a tampered with or corrupted biblical text or teachings of the Old or New Testaments, but with those who will not accept the clear teaching(s) of the Bible.

The only reason people have for believing that the Bible has been tampered with by the early Church (or anyone else) it that it clearly does not teach what they believe and practice. The Bible does not concur with their views or feelings. Therefore, they conjecture that it must have been tampered with by the early Church. This is a textbook case of circular reasoning--assuming the very thing you are suppose to or are trying to prove.

Just about anyone can assert just about anything, but this does not constitute proof of the claim. Proving it is another matter. For instance, just about anyone can file a lawsuit, but proving their case is a different issue. So it is with this charge.

Therefore, in light of the evidence, in light of accepted scholarly archaeological, historical, legal, literary, logical, and textual facts and principles, I affirm the authenticity and trustworthiness of the biblical text and acceptance of all that it teaches. Indeed, the Bible contains the definitive counsel concerning the meaning and purpose of life.
by
Craig S. Hawkins
AMEN!

[JohnnyX]

Campbell, first I will say that those are just websites. They are just reports that others have done regarding this issue. If you read closely and in context to my earlier statements you would have read the appropriate citings of the Vatican conventions concerning biblical revision...that was the subject. So what if it was written that long ago, how long has the bible been around? And if you know so much. Why aren't you explaining to me the origins of the bible and how it was written instead of just trying to refute my claims. I'm not asking to see how well you debate I'm asking about the bible. Do you know for a fact how and when and by whom it was written? Do you know how many original books there were? Have you ever read the hebrew torah or the greek writing of Paul? Can you tell me how Moses wrote Genesis? These are the questions I ask. Please. I have seen this happen all too often on these boards, there is no real debate but just people mouthing off their opinions which is fine but we must remembe opinions do not equal truth.

[JohnnyX]

"There is no objective evidence that the biblical text has been tampered with by the Jews or the early Church. There is no manuscript evidence, no archaeological evidence, no eyewitness--or otherwise--testimony, no support from the writings of the early Church, nor any evidence from the study of textual criticism to substantiate witches' or other occultist's or critics subjectively based claims of a tampered Bible."

This is one man's conclusion. He is saying that he couldn't find proof of tampering and he wont because records of those kind are not available to anyone except the Pope and top cardinals

let us remember the meaning of the words objectively and subjectively.

[campbell34]

"There is no objective evidence that the biblical text has been tampered with by the Jews or the early Church. There is no manuscript evidence, no archaeological evidence, no eyewitness--or otherwise--testimony, no support from the writings of the early Church, nor any evidence from the study of textual criticism to substantiate witches' or other occultist's or critics subjectively based claims of a tampered Bible."

This is one man's conclusion. He is saying that he couldn't find proof of tampering and he wont because records of those kind are not available to anyone except the Pope and top cardinals

let us remember the meaning of the words objectively and subjectively.

Here is one man's conclusion after years of being in the religion called denialism (denying all the proof of the Bible) he actually went out and search for himself the truth. He has seen the truth and he no longer cries wolf.

To the best of my memory, before I came to the saving grace of Jesus Christ, I did not believe the Bible was true. I doubted whether there was a God and believed that we were born, lived so many years, and then died. I owned a successful business and thought that I had succeeded by my own wits.
One evening, my wife and I heard some documentation that these were the last days before Jesus Christ would actually return. Not really wanting to hear it, I almost walked out. Something kept me there, and I listened. I was not convinced. I still had doubts whether or not there was a God. I doubted whether there really was a Satan, heaven, hell, or a judgment. Just to be sure, however, I decided to do a little research. My idea was to find out if the Bible was really true. Indeed, if I could find one contradiction, one error, or anything in the Bible that was not true, then that would be all that was needed to disregard it. (I wasn't necessarily interested in whether we were in the latter days or not, but just trying to find out if the Bible was really true.) I believed this would take a very short time.
As I have learned, the Bible has about 10,000 prophecies (verses). Nearly one-third of the Bible is directly or indirectly related to prophecy. This endeavour led me into far more research than I could have suspected. One thing needed, was to determine when the Bible was actually written. Because of this, a study of biblical history and archaeology was necessary. I found the Old Testament was indeed written before the coming of Jesus, as the Dead Sea Scrolls (containing parts of the book of Isaiah) were proven to have been written before Jesus came. The book of Isaiah includes forecasts of Jesus. Thousands of clay tablets have also been found, which confirm many accounts in the Bible.
I began studying the prophecies in the Bible. My wife would go to the library for me to obtain documentation from reference books to see if the prophecies really did take place. One day went by, then two days, and then a week. Every prophecy that we were able to get information on proved to be accurate. Two weeks went by. Then four weeks passed. My job became of secondary importance. Every prophecy that we were able to verify checked as being true. I was astonished, but far from convinced. I still had doubts as to whether there was a God, a heaven, or a hell yet I had to be sure. Later, there were people who would show me what appeared to be contradictions in the Bible, yet these were not contradictions at all, but only a lack of research on the part of those that said these things. I was searching to find if the Bible was true. My wife spent a lot of time at the library making copies of various reference materials, which I would check out against the Scriptures. Stubborn, that's me. Even after four weeks of intensive study, proving prophecy after prophecy was true, I was still skeptical and refused to believe. I began taking more time off from my business and investing it in study. One month turned into two, and two months turned into four. The more I researched, the more determined I became. It wasn't possible. The Bible could not be perfect. Thousands of prophecies, and every one perfect? No, impossible! Sixty-six books written by many people over hundreds of years and not one error? If I would admit that, I would have to admit there was a God, and I was not prepared to do it, even after months of research.
My studies also included various translations of the Bible, checking prophecies against reference books, archaeological discoveries, just to mention some. It became an obsession with me. My foremost desire was to know the truth. Four months turned into many months. I've never known anyone, before or since, that was willing to take this amount of time just to find out if the Bible was true. Finally, I had to admit I was wrong.
If you would walk across the street 10,000 times and never get hit, then you would walk across the street the next time by faith. So it was with me. Finally, after spending almost countless hours of research, I had to admit the Bible is true and is indeed the perfect Word of God. Anyone willing to take the time I did and do the same research, could only come to the same conclusion, if they are honest with themselves. I may have been the biggest skeptic in the world, but now I know. It did not come easy, but by God's mercy and grace, it did come.

[freakwentflyer]

I don't believe you.


Sorry, Campbell34, but I don't believe you did all the work and research you claim. Name just three "proofs". State the verse, then the proof. You can't name one that can't be shot full of holes with pure reason.

[JohnnyX]

It is my habit to take things I read and hear with a grain of salt. This may, I admit, inhibit me from putting my whole faith in some things. I know the bible is full of prophecies. Have they all come true 100% Well, I believe that is a matter of perception. Am I questioning your faith in the bible? No. I am not. I really hope I don't come off as a Christian basher because I believe in the freedom to worship in his/her own way. My point I was trying to make (for myself if not for anyone else) is that over centuries of revisions and translations some books were excluded, some were lost. Logic tells me that if man (he who prints and revises the bible we might buy at a bookstore) is imperfect and erreonous that his creations will be too. In all of the centuries in the history of the bible (outside of its worshipful purposes) this book (it must be made by men for you and I to have one to read) is subject as well as the society that embraces it. These are the points I am making. I'm sorry if we don't agree but in my own bad habit I feel the need to keep on foot on the ground.

[campbell34]

I don't believe you.


Sorry, Campbell34, but I don't believe you did all the work and research you claim. Name just three "proofs". State the verse, then the proof. You can't name one that can't be shot full of holes with pure reason.
WoW..... did you even read the first paragraph.....

Here is one man's conclusion after years of being in the religion called denialism (denying all the proof of the Bible) he actually went out and search for himself the truth. He has seen the truth and he no longer cries wolf.

THAT IS NOT ME....


But that is besides the fact.... what kind of proof would u like scientifical, archaelogical, or prophetical. I would write them all out for you but I do not have the time..... please look at my website ...

http://r-campbell34.tripod.com/proof

There you will see many of each proof and links to learn more about them.... and if there is something that you disagree with please tell....I will be happy to explain.... but as of now I have to get packing for my trip I will return aug. 14

[Epiphany]

Man didn't just write the Bible on his own. It was the holy spirit working through man. Just like when the holy spirit works through you to speak in tongues.

"Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had it's origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" - 1 Peter 1:20&21

[JohnnyX]

your missing my point....does the Holy Spirit then work through the press that prints them? And the companies that sell them for a price?

[Epiphany]

your missing my point....does the Holy Spirit then work through the press that prints them? And the companies that sell them for a price?
Not all Bibles have been watered down. The Greek-Hebrew King James version hasn't been tampered with much. Most of the changes in Bibles are due to translation.

[POPthree13]

Not all Bibles have been watered down. The Greek-Hebrew King James version hasn't been tampered with much. Most of the changes in Bibles are due to translation.
This is completely absurd. It is true that we continue to try and perfect translations, but the bible from the beginning was a collection of works with varying degrees of accuracy. Many biblical scholars (not anti-christians) agree that as much a 1/3rd of the bible is a forgery. Foer example... many books credited to an author have other authors who borrow a namesake to lend weiht to their writings. Of the Gospels, only John is original and the others and copies... differing interpretations of the same work. Naturally they sound alike.. they are the same document. When the bible was being assembled there were HUNDREDS of gospels and many were eliminated because they contradicted or were too outlandish to be beleivable. The bible was formed to sound accurate and discourage differing veiwpoints. Rome took a whole room of texts, versions and scrolls and baked them into one consice book and told you it was irrefutable, completely accurate, uneditable, and unchangeable and then they told you if you didn't beleive that they would burn you at the stake. Then they launched a campaign across the world to destroy any evidence that was contradictory. No wonder so many people beleive. Those who did not were killed.

Here are some interesting things left out of the bible...
Jesus probably married. He may have had offspring which fled to Gaul (france) after his execution. Jesus and Mary M. both wrote gospels, but they contradicted the divinity of Christ and were all but wiped form the earth. Jesus as a child had some pretty special gifts and he played with them as any child would. He and his family were run out of more than one village becasue he hurt and even killed playmates with his talents.

I think Jesus was a gifted messenger who came to give us an important message but that has been all but lost by:
A) Paul twisting the religion to spread it across Rome.
B) Rome twisting the message to pacify its populous/
C) Everyone buying into that without ever taking hte time to investigate history.

[Epiphany]

God often told men to write as they were being moved upon by his Holy Spirit.
(Exodus 17:14. Revelation 1:11, Luke 1:1-4)

examples:
God told Moses to write the ten commandments on tabletures
Jesus often said..."It is written".

Where is "it written" in account? In the Bible.

11 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture is given by the inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctorines, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness."


"Doctorine: Instruction for the seeking
Reproof: Proof for the questioning
Correction: Direction for the straying
Instruction in Righteousness: Training for the disciple"

The Bible often says, "God's word". What does God say his word is? The Bible

[JohnnyX]

Thanks POPthree13....I was bginning to think that I was being delusional since noone here have ever heard of any of these things.

[BlackBillBlake]

It should be obvious that the Bible cannot be literally true, as it contains contradictions, and things that from a literal point of view are pure nonsense - for example, Joshua commanding the sun to stand still when it is not the sun but the earth that moves etc.

That is not to saY that it doesn't contain truth on a symbolic level, esp. the new testament.
It strikes me as a bit strange that people get so worked up about this. Also I wonder how reading the old testament can be uplifting - what with ethnic clensing and so on.
The absolutely critical thing is the story of Jesus life, death and resurection - that could be literally true - but not I think the OT.

[freakwentflyer]

WoW..... did you even read the first paragraph.....

Here is one man's conclusion after years of being in the religion called denialism (denying all the proof of the Bible) he actually went out and search for himself the truth. He has seen the truth and he no longer cries wolf.

THAT IS NOT ME....


But that is besides the fact.... what kind of proof would u like scientifical, archaelogical, or prophetical. I would write them all out for you but I do not have the time..... please look at my website ...

http://r-campbell34.tripod.com/proof

There you will see many of each proof and links to learn more about them.... and if there is something that you disagree with please tell....I will be happy to explain.... but as of now I have to get packing for my trip I will return aug. 14
Campbell34-
I've taken the time to read you site and links. As compelling as it can be at times, everything listed is easily disputable. Everything can be dismissed as either- "recorded after the fact", "self fulfilling prophecies", or "loose connections between criptic prophecies and actual events". From a pure scientific standpoint there is no proof, only enough evidence for theory.

[freakwentflyer]

"The bible is a book. it is a good book. But it is not the only book."

'Inherit the Wind' Jerome Lawrence & Robert E. Lee.HEY! I did that play in high school. That was (Henry Drummond) my line.

[campbell34]

Campbell34-
I've taken the time to read you site and links. As compelling as it can be at times, everything listed is easily disputable. Everything can be dismissed as either- "recorded after the fact", "self fulfilling prophecies", or "loose connections between criptic prophecies and actual events". From a pure scientific standpoint there is no proof, only enough evidence for theory.
-Are you going to get a little more detailed than that? Maybe give examples. It's easy to make broad statments.....

Jesus is the only way.

[campbell34]

Yes Ive heard of the DEAD SEA SCROLLS....but I also know that the books that were ousted from the vatican soon after the invention of the press when the pope decided that the bible was to be printed and distributed. After the disclusion of the lost books they were never to be seen again and their location has been kept a secret by the vatican. Why would these books be so secret? What didn't he want us to read? The bible was written by MEN not GOD!!!!! This is a fact. Not only that now the WORD OF GOD is written by a machine!!!! That is soooooooo HOLY! It is a book written by men who make mistakes so I take from it what I feel is useful to help me be a better person and to understand the culture of Hebrews and their Folklore and a picture of Palestine (Yes, Palestine) under the control of the Roman Empire. Not to mention the teachings of a very enlightened human being that I admire very much.
-The Dead Sea Scrolls were written before the church so that rules out the thinking that they Bible has been changed or mistranslated.
The Scrolls meaning matches up with todays Bible giving Christians confidence that the Bible has not been changed.

The men that wrote the Bible(Moses, Zechariah, Paul, ect.) must have been Gods themselves because what they wrote, what they predicted has been prophetically or archaeologically confirmed. THE FACT IS GOD INSPIRED THESE MEN.

[freakwentflyer]

-Are you going to get a little more detailed than that? Maybe give examples. It's easy to make broad statments.....

Jesus is the only way.

What do you mean ME, be detailed? I asked you for 3 examples of solid proof and you referred me to your site. You pick your best 3 examples from your site, or from any source, and I'll (when I get around to it) be glad to narrow my statements.

[queenannie]

The Bible often says, "God's word". What does God say his word is? The Bible

The bible says (in the 4th gospel, the only reliable one, IMO) that the Word is Jesus. Not the bible. When the bible was written, no one knew it was going to become the 'bible'.

[campbell34]

Good luck! As you can see from some of these posts, hard core bible beaters will keep you going in circles with twisted logic.

Try to take an intellectual walk down their path and you just find your shoes covered in dogma.
The stories of the bible are based on actual events so they see those connections as "proof".
All of the prophecies are inspired by events that continually happen through history, or are self fulfilling prophecies. So, nothing earth shattering in them.
I use to know the bible well, years ago. As at teen I planned to be a preacher.
Because of the new evidence that is coming in, it is now harder to believe that the stories of the bible did not happen. The facts appear to support the bibical accounts.
This is not church dogma, but archaeological facts. Yes, anytime I see the bottom of the Red sea covered with the remnants of the egyptian army and a burnt graniet mountain top, or a sealed east gate in Jerusalem that no one can open, when I discover hundereds of fullfilled prophecies in the bible, I do believe this is proof. And if anyone is honest with themselves they would consider this to be proof. Of coarse all archaeological discoveries must be twisted logic. Oh yeah, the bible flood never happened, but they are finding pillar lava on the top of mount ararat at 14,000 feet. Wonder who carried it up there?

[freakwentflyer]

RED SEA- The Egyptians would have carted their army, chariots and all across the Red Sea in boats, and surely many of them would have sunk over the years.


The story of the sea parting most likely evolved from the proven fact that at around the time the Jews left Egypt, there was a period where the Red Sea water level had dropped considerably due to a massive volcanic eruption in the region. There would have been an area where the Jews could have simply walked across. Even if the Romans didn't actually "chase" them, many years after the water had risen back closing off the passage, the stories that the Jewish tribes passed on verbally from generation to generation would easily have evolve into what was finally written down- God parted the water for them, then flooded the persuing Egyptians.

Any intelligent person should see that the acts of God stories in the Bible are all things of nature that the people at the time didn't understand.

As far as that closed gate "that can't be opened". That gate remains closed because of the proficy, not the other way around. It can be opened. The Christians there will not allow it to be opened.

Israel itself is a self fulfilling proficy.
When you say the Bible is true, I assume you mean it is the true word of God, not just that the stories are base on true events. Then you are saying that it is possible for God to speak to a human and tell him that it is OK to go into another peoples land, kill everyone including women and children and steal their homes. I refer to the book of Joshua.
That mentality is excactly why there is no peace in the middle east today,- religious self righteousness from all sides.

What gets me about you "religious" people is you get caught up in unimportant ideas. You know, I personally believe that the real Jesus was trying to move his people away from that dogmatic way of faith. Wisely, he didn't say "your religion sucks", he said " I bring forth a NEW covenant." Now I don't believe everything in the Bilble atributed to Jesus, but I do believe that.

Faith in our maker. Faith in a higher power. Feeling that we are part of that higher power (children if you will), yet being humble before it, that is all I require. A promise of heaven or threat of hell is meaningless to me.
We humans, have emerged from the earth with enough intelligence to wonder about our maker. Religions of the past help us track the path in which we attempted to understand our reason for being. There is a treasure of wisdom in all past religions, even the unwritten Native American beliefs. But to stay stuck in past mindsets is not wise at all. Learn from the past and move ahead. We will never achieve peace on earth if we don't.
I personally don't believe anyone can fully experience the joy of spiritual faith until they seperate it in their heart and mind from the shackles of religion.

[mynameiskc]

i was reading an article in the BAR about a man who discovered a translation error. moses and his followers crossed a reed sea, not the Red Sea. did anyone else hear about that one?

[TARABELLE]

i was reading an article in the BAR about a man who discovered a translation error. moses and his followers crossed a reed sea, not the Red Sea. did anyone else hear about that one?
Unless you are reading the bible in the language it was written, you don't have a clue what it really says. You're just going off someone else's translation and to take that literally just seems shortsighted to me.

[mynameiskc]

Unless you are reading the bible in the language it was written, you don't have a clue what it really says. You're just going off someone else's translation and to take that literally just seems shortsighted to me.
well i know, which was the point of the question. has anyone heard any more about the red sea/reed sea discussion?

[iscreamchocolate]

I had someone trying to defend that the Bible is 100% accurate. I found this person did not know what they were talking about. It infuriates me to think that people believe everything that the Bible says.
Does anyone else agree?
I totally agree... id on't believe in anything in the bible... :):)

[JohnnyX]

-The Dead Sea Scrolls were written before the church so that rules out the thinking that they Bible has been changed or mistranslated.
The Scrolls meaning matches up with todays Bible giving Christians confidence that the Bible has not been changed.

The men that wrote the Bible(Moses, Zechariah, Paul, ect.) must have been Gods themselves because what they wrote, what they predicted has been prophetically or archaeologically confirmed. THE FACT IS GOD INSPIRED THESE MEN.
I am not arguing that God inspired these men but the whole of what you just said is so logically invalid that I don't think you said what you meant to say. The only thing that is confirmed is that someone contextually projected verses of the bible to current events. Which can also be done with just about any other book in the world so your theory actually becomes humorously incorrect.

[campbell34]

What do you mean ME, be detailed? I asked you for 3 examples of solid proof and you referred me to your site. You pick your best 3 examples from your site, or from any source, and I'll (when I get around to it) be glad to narrow my statements.
Because im a little short on time could u answer one question for me. According to the bible God flooded the whole earth. Now most people may not believe that story. But if u were to go to the top of mount Ararat at the 14,000 foot level they have discovered pillar lava. Pillar lava can only form when a volcanic vent is submerged underwater. So my question is, how is it that they are finding pillar lava at 14,000 feet?

[campbell34]

RED SEA- The Egyptians would have carted their army, chariots and all across the Red Sea in boats, and surely many of them would have sunk over the years.


The story of the sea parting most likely evolved from the proven fact that at around the time the Jews left Egypt, there was a period where the Red Sea water level had dropped considerably due to a massive volcanic eruption in the region. There would have been an area where the Jews could have simply walked across. Even if the Romans didn't actually "chase" them, many years after the water had risen back closing off the passage, the stories that the Jewish tribes passed on verbally from generation to generation would easily have evolve into what was finally written down- God parted the water for them, then flooded the persuing Egyptians.

Any intelligent person should see that the acts of God stories in the Bible are all things of nature that the people at the time didn't understand.

As far as that closed gate "that can't be opened". That gate remains closed because of the proficy, not the other way around. It can be opened. The Christians there will not allow it to be opened.

Israel itself is a self fulfilling proficy.
When you say the Bible is true, I assume you mean it is the true word of God, not just that the stories are base on true events. Then you are saying that it is possible for God to speak to a human and tell him that it is OK to go into another peoples land, kill everyone including women and children and steal their homes. I refer to the book of Joshua.
That mentality is excactly why there is no peace in the middle east today,- religious self righteousness from all sides.

What gets me about you "religious" people is you get caught up in unimportant ideas. You know, I personally believe that the real Jesus was trying to move his people away from that dogmatic way of faith. Wisely, he didn't say "your religion sucks", he said " I bring forth a NEW covenant." Now I don't believe everything in the Bilble atributed to Jesus, but I do believe that.

Faith in our maker. Faith in a higher power. Feeling that we are part of that higher power (children if you will), yet being humble before it, that is all I require. A promise of heaven or threat of hell is meaningless to me.
We humans, have emerged from the earth with enough intelligence to wonder about our maker. Religions of the past help us track the path in which we attempted to understand our reason for being. There is a treasure of wisdom in all past religions, even the unwritten Native American beliefs. But to stay stuck in past mindsets is not wise at all. Learn from the past and move ahead. We will never achieve peace on earth if we don't.
I personally don't believe anyone can fully experience the joy of spiritual faith until they seperate it in their heart and mind from the shackles of religion.
Well first of all where they are finding all of these chariot wheels,axels,and coarl encrusted dead mens bones is across a 10 mile stretch. No sunken ships from that time period have been discovered. They have also found two 17 foot pillars with the names of Moses, Pharaoh, death, and Solomon, on oppsite shores. Carved in rock near the pillars they have found the entire story of what happened there. The depth of water at the center of the ten mile stretch is one thousand feet deep. If the water was low at this time to allow passage, then the oceans of the world would all have to of been shy about 1000 feet. I'm pretty sure volcanic activity could not do that. Even if you could over look the sea droping a 1000 feet, and some how the Jews got across. It would still not explain how Pharaohs army is now laying at the bottom between the two 17 foot pillars incrusted in coral.

The closed East Gate.
You stated the gate is closed because the Christians will not allowed it to be opened. The problem with that is the Christians are not in control of the Gate.
The Jews are, and before the Jews controled it the moslems controled it. The Moslems know about the prophecy and tried to break it but failed on two occasions. See if they could of got through the gate it would of maid the Bible null and void by breaking the prophecy. The Bible stated not to worry the prophecy will not be broken. The first time the moslems tried to break through it and on the very day they tried the British took control of Jerusalem, around 1917. After the British gave up control of Jerusalem the moslems tried again to break down the gate but on the very day in 1967 the Jews took control of Jerusalem. The bible speaks with confidence that the gate will not be opened until Christ returns. And He alone will enter that gate on His way to the temple.

The only time I get stuck in the past is when I find something that is real and verifiable. And what is real and verifiable today, is the Bible.

There is a treasure of wisdom in all past religions?
According to the God of the bible, God is not the author of confusion. The problem with all past religions is each one of them opposes the other. Not one of them agreed.

The Bible teaches that the world is a wicked place, and there will never be peace untill Christ returns, from what I can see, the bible got that right.

Shackles of Religion
There is a big difference between religion and faith in Christ. Don't confuse the two. If I have learned anything from the past it is that the Bible is true and verifiable. You can depend on this book, believeing in anything that is not verifiable makes you a blind faith believer, and that is the worst kind of religion.

[freakwentflyer]

'Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the LORD drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.' Exodus 14:21

Could this most famous of all stories have any basis in fact?

The reed sea theory If you read the bible in the original Hebrew, the word 'red' is mistranslated. In the Hebrew bible Moses and his people cross the 'yam suph' - the Sea of Reeds.

Egyptologist David Rohl: Now this is a strange story, I mean you can imagine trying to cross the Red Sea would be horrendously difficult but a Reed Sea is something quite different. This is marshland areas and this is probably what they crossed. Ancient Egyptian texts mention an area called Patchoufy: The Reeds. This is probably what they crossed.'So Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to its normal course when the morning appeared. And as the Egyptians fled into it, the LORD threw the Egyptians into the midst of the sea.' Exodus 14:27

How then do we account for the sea coming back and inundating the soldiers?

David Rohl: If you're talking about a shallow reed swamp of maybe two or three metres maximum of water, this sort of thing is physically possible. In fact it's been witnessed within the last 100 years... The Egyptian army might not have been completely decimated. Many of the horses would have been killed, chariots would have been stuck in the mud.What about the famous image of a great canyon of water? Could this have any basis in reality?

Computer simulations of the Santorini eruption show that the collapse of the island would have triggered a mega-tsunami - a 600 foot wave travelling at 400 miles an hour.

Floyd McCoy, a tsunami expert says this was one of the largest waves in history and must have reached Egypt.

We find evidence, believe it or not, on the deep ocean floor. The tsunamis actually scraped across the bottom of the ocean floor in the Mediterranean and disturbed the sediment. We can find that sediment. That gives us some indication of the directions they went .. The computer model showed us waves radiating out all over the Mediterranean, reaching the Nile Delta.Could the tsunami have divided up the waters of the Reed Sea? If you look at ordinary waves you can see that just before they break, the water withdraws from the shore. A mega-tsunami would syphon billions of gallons of water - not just from the shore but from connecting rivers and lakes - creating dry land for as long as two hours.

Tsunami expert, Costas Synolakis: We should think of a two-metre tsunami wave like a rapid change of the sea level by two metres along the coast, and that can can travel several kilometres inland. The destructive force of the wave could easily destroy an army.Is there any other evidence for this theory?

In 1994, the Philippine island of Mindoro was hit by a tsunami and an earthquake. The earthquake caused a massive crack in the bed of a lake about a mile inland. An eye-witness said he saw the water like a waterfall in the centre of the lake just go down. After a while, he could see the bottom of the lake, he said 'I thought I could even walk through.'

Then the tsunami arrived one mile further down the river and swept away a 6,000 ton barge lying on the shore. The mega-tsunami which hit the Nile delta was a thousand times more devastating than this one.



__________________________________________________ ____________

Don't have time but I have much more to come!

[campbell34]

Unless you are reading the bible in the language it was written, you don't have a clue what it really says. You're just going off someone else's translation and to take that literally just seems shortsighted to me.
The claim that the Red Sea really means Reed Sea is false. In first Kings 9:26 it states that King Solomon made his navy on the shore of the Red Sea. Red Sea in Hebrew is Yam Suph-which means Red Sea. If Yam Suph was the Reed Sea Solomons ships would still be stuck in the mud. The wording in first Kings 9:26 is the same as the wording found in Exodus 15:4 to 22. Also the recent discoveries of the two 17 foot granit pillars marking the actual crossing sight were believed to of been placed there by Solomon. Also the entire story of the crossing was discovered carved in stone near the pillars. Between the pillars is a distance of 10 miles across the sea. It is at this spot where they are finding the remains of Pharaoh's army. The Reed Sea nonsense was an old arguement debated for years. Todays recent archaeological descoveries have pretty much put that myth to rest, except for those who have not done their homework.

[freakwentflyer]

I see most of your "proof" comes from the fraud, Ron Wyatt-
Ron Wyatt Information Resources
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Q. We had a man named Ron Wyatt who came to our city and claimed that he had discovered Noah's Ark and even the Ark of the Covenant? Is this for real?
A. Ron Wyatt, who has been telling his tales of discovering Noah's Ark, the chariots of Pharaoh, the pillars of Solomon, the true Mt. Sinai, the tomb of the Patriarchs, Sodom & Gomorrah, the place of Christ's crucifixion, and the Ark of the Covenant for many years, has been documented as an archaeological fraud. Both former "friends" as well as professional archaeologists in his own denomination (Seventh- Day Adventist) have published detailed refutations of all of his "discoveries." Rather than go into such details here we refer those interested in the documentation against Wyatt to request a free packet of papers by archaeologists in Wyatt's denomination from: Dr. David Merling, Associate Director & Curator, Institute of Archaeology, Horn Archaeological Museum, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI 49104-0990.
Yet (http://yet/), despite the fact that Wyatt has never submitted verifiable evidence for his claims to competent authorities, his books, video tapes and lectures in churches and at hotel meeting rooms (with the Prophecy Club) have won him a fervent following among less discerning Christians. Concerning the claims that most excite his audiences - his supposed discovery of Noah's Ark and the Ark of the Covenant - we may briefly state the following. His Noah's Ark site had been examined and long abandoned by Ark hunters and geologists as a natural formation before Wyatt and others came to the spot, and it has continued to be proven to be such (even though the Turks gave it credibility for the sake of tourism). There are eight other smaller formations like it in the area, so if this is Noah's Ark there must have been a fleet of them! As to the Ark of the Covenant, Wyatt says that he found it along with the Table of Shewbread, the Golden Altar of Incense, and the Menorah (a seven-branched candlelabra) which stood in the ancient Temple, in a cave inside the hill called "Gordon's Calvary" in eastern Jerusalem. Wyatt even says he scrapped blood off of the Mercy Seat of the Ark, had it analyzed and found it to have half the normal number of human chromosomes (therefore, the blood of the Virgin born Christ). He further says that the Ark was positioned in such a way so that when Christ was crucified His blood fell through a hole in the cliff above and landed on the Mercy Seat (thus fulfilling the atonement typified by this object). While such a story thrills audiences, "Gordon's Calvary" cannot be the place of Christ's crucifixion. It has no archaeological support, whereas the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, identified with Christ's crucifixion since the 4th century A.D. has much). "Gordon's Calvary" at the site of the Protestant "Garden Tomb" is part of a complex of First Temple tombs (about 600 years before Christ), but the New Testament says Jesus tomb was "newly hewn" ().Wyatt's "discoveries" have been rejected by real archaeologists not because, as Wyatt contends, they are jealous, or lack faith, but because his stories are unsubstantiated by facts. If facts are the basis for our faith (Christ actually died and rose again), then it is no lack of faith to demand of those with incredible claims that they be supported with evidence. The bottom line is: Wyatt has given us nothing to believe, so believe nothing he says!
Posted November 20, 1999
ARCHEOLOGY WITH RON WYATT: a personal account by Bernard Brandstater (http://www.ldolphin.org/wyatt1.html)
Letter from Joe Zias (http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/Zias.html)
Dear Mr. Searcy
Mr. Ron Wyatt is neither an archaeologist nor has he ever carried out a legally licensed excavation in Israel or Jerusalem. In order to excavate one must have at least a BA in archaeology which he does not possess despite his claims to the contrary. We are aware of his claims which border on the absurd as they have no scientific basis whatsoever nor have they ever been published in a professional journal. They fall into the category of trash which one finds in tabloids such as the National Enquirer, Sun etc. It's amazing that anyone would believe them. Furthermore, he has been throughly discredited by various Christian organizations such as Creation Research in Calif. For the latest on his "discoveries" I suggest going into the WWW (use Vista) someone called Tentmaker decided to do an expose of his various claims. Here you will find the truth, which is more amazing that his (RW) fictions.
Shalom
Joe Zias
Curator of Anthropology/Archaeology
Israel Antiquities Authority

Ron Wyatt has never received a license from the IAA to excavate here in Jerusalem. If he has then let him produce a license for his digs and surveys in Jerusalem, the Judean Desert, Mt. Sinai etc.
As for the chariot wheel, a bluff, produce it, on what was the dating made? Saw it in the video, it looks like a hoax. If it exists date it in a C-14 lab. As a amauter arch. which he claims to be he should know of many.
The Noah's ark discovery has been discredited. If it is true, and I saw the tape, show lab reports on the C-14 lab report.
I saw his video which is an embarrasment to the world of arch. The only people who can believe this junk is one who has never studied arch. As for the impt. archaeologists he mentions in his reports. I have never heard of one of them after 25 yrs in the profession. As for the James Irwin, what are his credentials regarding the world of Biblical Arch. Did he have a BA in the profession, he was conned into believing this as have many others who wish to believe rather than to know.
Lastly if RW can supply us with the lab report on the so called blood of Jesus along with a sample for independent testing which shows 24 chromosones I will then be led along the road to Damascus. Otherwise he is bluffing.
Joe Zias
Curator of Anthropology/Archaeology
Israel Antiquities Authority

ABR ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER
Vol. 2, Issue 2 Circulation: 2675
February 15, 2002
http://www.christiananswers.net/abr (http://www.christiananswers.net/abr)
Ron Wyatt's Sodom
Rev. Gary Byers
Geologist Steve Austin of the Institute for Creation Research recently examined evidence from a site on the west side of the Dead Sea (at the foot of Masada), suggested by Ron Wyatt as the location of the destroyed Biblical city of Sodom. Austin is one of the few geologists to have critically examined evidence from this region in light of Wyatt's claims. The site was recently visited, and the geological features were photographed by Robert Brecka of Baltimore, MD. Austin examined BreckaÕs photos and also tested and evaluated samples from the area.
Having studied the geology of the local Lisan Marl in both Israel and Jordan, Austin noted the samples were typical of lake environments. Although not having specifically studied Wyatt's site, Austin has observed similar landforms and erosion features in the marl strata northeast of Masada. Referring to the Dead Sea basin as one of the world's best pull-apart basins, he pointed out its similarity to the Imperial Valley and Salton Sea of California in both tectonic structure and desert landforms.

After examining Brecka's photographs of the Lisan Marl on the west side of the Dead Sea, Austin noted the region's world-class examples of desert landforms. He described the Lisan Marl as ancient lake sediment from a former Dead Sea, which occupied the basin at a higher level just thousands of years ago at the time of the "Ice Age." The marl is very poorly consolidated and is composed of microscopic crystals of calcite (calcium carbonate) and gypsum (calcium sulfate with water). Austin identified piping tubes created by vertical fracturing, which then created sinkholes and cave-like structures. Although some have the appearance of human excavations, they are entirely of natural origin. Bridging, arches, rills, sapping structures and gully erosion were prominent in the region. Natural marl joints broke off in linear rectangular features that created narrow mesas (buttes) and pediments (gravel-covered mesas). Circular marl structures ("pinnacles" and "hodos") were also identified. Numerous erosional forms containing resistant strata (known as "elephant knees") were also observed in the marl formation.

Sulfur nodules, common throughout the site, were also examined and Austin suggested their presence was from the chemical alteration of gypsum within the strata. Earthquake-produced fluidization structures of beautiful swirls along with lamination forms and the phenomenon of desert varnish were also observed in the Lisan formations.
With all these features being common natural phenomenon and typical of dried up lake environments, Austin believed many were relic desert forms. He suggested they were created a couple of thousand years ago. Based on Brecka's photographs, Austin saw no reason to believe there was anything that was not a natural geological feature. While not totally ruling it out, he did not observe anything suggesting modification by human activity.
The Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) also does not believe there is any evidence for ancient artifacts or structures at the site. Yet, they were favorable to Brecka's interest and encouraged him to apply for an excavation permit. (Photographs and a fuller report of the geological features at this site, believed by Ron Wyatt to be the destroyed city of Sodom, will appear in a coming issue of ABR's quarterly magazine Bible and Spade.)
Tentmaker.org (http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/index.html)

[freakwentflyer]

Also check out-

http://www.tentmaker.org/Dew/Dew7/D7-AGreatChristianScam.html

[freakwentflyer]

And check out-

http://www.isitso.org/guide/wyatt.html

Seems there is endless evidence against your man Ron Wyatt.

I suggest you stop looking for proof in God in a book. Have some real faith. I see all the proof I need in my daughters smile.

[queenannie]

There is a big difference between religion and faith in Christ. Don't confuse the two. If I have learned anything from the past it is that the Bible is true and verifiable.
There is also a big difference between true and verifiable. The bible is 100% truth, without doubt, and support for faith is found on every page. A lot of things are verifiable, especially after the discoveries of Ron Wyatt, which sadly seem to have gone largely ignored.

But that's not to say that the truth of the bible lies within its verifiability. That is a dangerous statement to make, in regard to verifying with human means. It is only verifiable spiritually, and in that way, it is more convincing than any humanly discovered evidence could ever be!

You can depend on this book, believeing in anything that is not verifiable makes you a blind faith believer, and that is the worst kind of religion.
Is not faith defined as "unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence"? That's the way I always understood it. When we look for verification of the bible, are we not rendering our faith imperfect?

I believe, without a doubt, the canonized bible has been altered to suit the political agendas of man, namely the Jews and then the Catholics. The Roman Empire needed help ruling the masses, so they adopted a policy of ignorance induced fearful compliance of the people. If you read some of the 'Fathers' papers on heresy, they do not say 'because the bible tells me so', or 'because Jesus said', they said 'because the Catholic authorities said so.' That, IMO, is a definite example of why blind faith believers do comprise the worst kind of religion.

BUT, blind faith believers are the ideal spirit-of-G-d seekers. If you adopt that attitude when reading the bible, much more can be gained from it. It is not a lawbook (unless you're Jewish, and still that's debatable), nor a history text book, or a practical genealogical record. It is a complete package, meant to be treated as such, and not dissected in the modern custom of today, which drains all meaning and message from it, like life blood. It is about symbolism, repeating patterns, and there are 2 or 3 storylines (that I have seen) that run through it, with the most amazing consistency of anything ever written. Unless we read it with our minds emptied of what we think we want to find in it, and be 'as little children' (think Dr. Seuss, how much can be learned there? A lot, if you're a little kid and don't wish to verify the existence of green eggs or yaks!), we are missing more than we're gaining.

I'm not saying that the things told of didn't happen, or that they did, or anything like that. What I'm saying is this: If we value the lesson, we must trust the teacher. Why do we have teachers? To tell us of those things we do not know. Do we feel compelled to prove every little thing they tell us? No, most of us take them at their word, figuring they've met qualifications of some kind, and then we go on, applying what we've learned. Now and then, we might find something wasn't quite as they said, but mostly their information was viable. Why not G-d's? He is far more wise, loving, and caring than the very best teacher that ever taught. So why not believe the bible, within the context of an illustrated lesson, with morals of the story and an acceptance that it is totally true, without questioning until application time?

There's nothing wrong with questioning, but ask the right questions! And don't seek to verify G-d in the records and accounts of mankind. That's a nonverbal demonstration of a lack of faith, and I don't see how it is otherwise. You'll never find the absolute truth unless you totally trust G-d to reveal it to you. I know this is a fact, from my own experience. All this I say from the perspective of having been in various stages of seeking and verifying, etc. But I always believed 100% that G-d would show me the truth if that's what I wanted.

From the changes in my life, inward and outward, I know that He has.

The original Hebrew and Greek usually use 'trust' instead of 'believe'.

Mark 1:15 *And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Mark 9:23 *Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth.

Mark 11:23 *For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.

Mark 11:24 *Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.

John 3:12 *If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

John 5:44 *How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

John 5:47 *But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

Acts 13:39 *And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Hebrews 11:6 *But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

[freakwentflyer]

P.S. Here's another good one-

http://www.christiananswers.net/cgi-bin/htsearch?words=Ron+Wyatt&restrict=abr%7Cq-abr%7Carchaeology&config=htdig&exclude=&format=long&sort=score&htsearch=1

[POPthree13]

A lot of things are verifiable, especially after the discoveries of Ron Wyatt, which sadly seem to have gone largely ignored.
They go largly ignored because Wyatt's only followers are those who are yearning for proof where there is none. Mr. Wyatt has been denounced again and again by REAL biblical archaeologists who rightly claim that Mr. Wyatt takes credibility away from all real research. I think the subject of biblical archaeology is fascinating and I find Mr. Wyatt's discreditation of the real work going on simply a crime. I for one am glad the work of this nut job has gone mostly ignored. Otherwise the entire body of real archaeological work would be brought into question...

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/wyatt.html

http://www.isitso.org/guide/wyatt.html

http://www.uhcg.org/Q&A/Ron-Wyatt.html

http://www.isitso.org/guide/wyattsuper.html

[freakwentflyer]

Quote Queenannie-
A lot of things are verifiable, especially after the discoveries of Ron Wyatt, which sadly seem to have gone largely ignored.


And there seems to be good reasons for Wyatt being ignored. Read my last posts and links.

[queenannie]

And there seems to be good reasons for Wyatt being ignored. Read my last posts and links.

That's neither here nor there, that is my whole point! Whether or not Mr Wyatt really found these things, or if they're 'for real', by man's judgment, has no bearing whatsoever on the question of whether the bible's for real.

That's what's getting in the way with everyone! Trying to get man to show proof of G-d. That's basically idolatry, if you look at truthfully. Who do you believe? Not Ron Wyatt, not Annie, not archeologists, but G-d, Jesus! The source of Truth with a capital T.

All this time wasted trying to verify could be spent by verifying the bible with itself. All you're doing is proclaiming to G-d that you have not much faith.

Does it make you mad that I say that? I could care less whether this stuff is true (although Mr. Wyatt's 'discoveries' are an interesting read, regardless) because it's not always going to be here.

Heaven and earth will both pass away, but my words will never pass away--Jesus

[POPthree13]

I think what Wyatt's work shows us is just how gullible we as human beings can be. Therefore anyone who does not take the time to search for truth is in danger of having 'faith' in whatever is handed them... right or wrong.


Seek and you will find...
knock and the door will be opened....

The bible teaches us about faith, but is says nothing about BLIND faith.

[queenannie]

freakwentflyer and pop13:

I did look at the links you both posted. I mentioned Ron Wyatt because that's the only biblical archeology of any sort I've read about, and I happened upon him in looking for some reference to the Noah's ark story and photo I had seen on TV as a child. It turned out to be the same as the one he discovered. Also, from the previous posts, it seemed that's where the information was coming from.

Like I said, I don't look for verification with archeology and other things, any more, as I found them to be a stumbling block. When I focused on the bible, and said 'I trust G-d to give me the truth within this book' it gave me the ability to trust without needing proof given by man. That's not to say I don't look up associated research about the bible, but in no way do I base my belief on the findings. I'm just not much into archeology for the simple fact of the time factor which it relies on, and I truly believe the bible is not going to match our designated timelines. There are many reasons I believe this, but none of them make what it says not truth.

I didn't realize that Mr. Wyatt had the beliefs and alledged agenda these articles state he did. I didn't get into that much, because his beliefs have nothing to do with mine, the same for everyone. There were a few things in a couple of the accounts that didn't go along with my understandings, interpretations of Revelation, for one thing, in the ark of the covenant story. The pictures of the garden tomb struck a cord with me, as did the Mt Sinai stuff. But none of it affected my belief in the bible.

Although these articles have valid points, they have a comparable amount of invalid points, as well, based on the human vs. divine proof thing. One example is I read somewhere in these articles that the baal's altar stones couldn't have been the ones from the Exodus, because they were too big, and the bible says Aaron built the altar. The problems I see with that justification are #1 that could have easily meant Aaron supervised the building of the altar, even today the foreman is often credited with the whole job, just for the sake of simplicity or whatever. #2 If that's not the reason for why it is said that way, another reason could be that there is a symbolism inherent in the passage that depends on saying Aaron was the builder, not the supervisor. I don't know, because I haven't read that passage with that aspect in mind. #3 No one has yet been able to agree on the actual date of the Exodus, mainly because each 'biblical scholar' or 'archeologist' is using just one reference alongside the bible to come to all these separate conclusions.

If we're going to compare other findings alongside the bible, just for giggles, let's say, then why not compare several findings from various fields simultaneously? I guarantee a lot more clarity would result from a wider perspective. It's easier to pick out the truth when there's comparison made! That's only logical, and it seems 'scientific' for those that dig that avenue.

Still, the bottom line is this: G-d didn't give us His word for biblical proof 101 at the university of human error. He gave it to us so that we can graduate/drop out of that fallible school, and become true scholars, justified by faith.

But until we throw away all textbooks but the bible, when placing our faith in what we read in the bible, we won't be able to see what it really says. No one wants to accept apocryphal biblical texts, that haven't been mutilitated by politics, despite their ability to be proven within themselves and alongside the canonized bible, yet we will argue over the validity of human discoveries! The only two main discoveries viable in this discussion were both found hidden in clay jars/pots, in the desert, in the 1940's. Everything we need to know to feel we truly are justified in faith can be found there.

Can you really say you believe in G-d if you won't take Him at his word? Or His Word?

[POPthree13]

I can't disagree with anything you have said. I am certainly not trying to erode anyone's faith by discounting Wyatt's stuff. I appreciate any thoughtful christian perspective and I fear for people who will swallow hook-line and sinker anything that seems to proove their point.


I for one do beleive ina God and think he has spoken to us throughout the ages through various mediums and continues to speak to us to this day. I think a conscious effort must be undertaken to understand the context of our teachers and search for truth in the necessarily human interpretation and recording of these messages. Arguing over stories is entirely irrelevant, and this generally is my major complaint. Many people will fight to the end over stories presented to us without any research into who wrote them, what the political/social/and religious framework was in place.. and in the end does it REALLY matter? If God is God then it doesn't matter if his process is evolution, or just shitting out animals? If God is God then who cares in Noah could cram half a billion species into a boat? If God is God then the only thing that matters is building a persoanl relationship and understanding of the forces that bring you closer to it.

[queenannie]

I can't disagree with anything you have said. I am certainly not trying to erode anyone's faith by discounting Wyatt's stuff. I appreciate any thoughtful christian perspective and I fear for people who will swallow hook-line and sinker anything that seems to proove their point.Ditto. That's the problem, trying to prove their point. Whose point is it, really, if you believe in G-d? I'd say G-d's!


.. and in the end does it REALLY matter? If God is God then it doesn't matter if his process is evolution, or just shitting out animals? If God is God then who cares in Noah could cram half a billion species into a boat? If God is God then the only thing that matters is building a persoanl relationship and understanding of the forces that bring you closer to it.
That's also the problem, trying to understand the hows and whys instead of just believing. He loves us unconditionally, IMO, and so conditional faith is not up to par in return. I learned so much more after I quit trying to conform the bible to my understanding and instead tried to understand the bible. I do believe there's only one force which can truly bring you closer to knowing G-d, one on one, and that's trusting that it's possible to do so with just the two of you involved, on the basic level. There's nothing wrong with comparing notes, and learning from each other's understandings, but the foundation must be original to ourselves.

Trying to prove to each other why what we believe is the absolute thing to believe is really not about faith, it's about human insecurity and fear, mainly fear of dying. Both of which can be easily remedied by one initial 'leap of faith'. But no one wants to strive for something they'd rather already think they have. If it doesn't set you free, it's not truth.

[campbell34]

I can't disagree with anything you have said. I am certainly not trying to erode anyone's faith by discounting Wyatt's stuff. I appreciate any thoughtful christian perspective and I fear for people who will swallow hook-line and sinker anything that seems to proove their point.


I for one do beleive ina God and think he has spoken to us throughout the ages through various mediums and continues to speak to us to this day. I think a conscious effort must be undertaken to understand the context of our teachers and search for truth in the necessarily human interpretation and recording of these messages. Arguing over stories is entirely irrelevant, and this generally is my major complaint. Many people will fight to the end over stories presented to us without any research into who wrote them, what the political/social/and religious framework was in place.. and in the end does it REALLY matter? If God is God then it doesn't matter if his process is evolution, or just shitting out animals? If God is God then who cares in Noah could cram half a billion species into a boat? If God is God then the only thing that matters is building a persoanl relationship and understanding of the forces that bring you closer to it.
Lets not be vague on this issue, it's not just stories we are arguing about here. It is the credibility of the bible. The truth is the facts supporting scripture are coming out. Most of the world does not want to hear these facts nor do they want a personal God. They want a God that looks the other way when they live a lifestyle the bible condems. Thats why some speak of God as an it. As if He was some force floating in space. God is not an it, He was fully human and He is fully God. The world showed God how much they love truth when they nailed Him to a cross. Recently two other men found their way to mount Sinai and came back with pictures and video recordings. They are telling the same story that Ron wyatt and his son told.
National Geographic Television stated after viewing their pictures and videos, "This is a masterpiece of research and significance..a great piece of work and one of the most remarkable things that has happened of recent years." -Jack Hayford. Ian Reed, of Reuters News Agency "What could possibly upstage the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Maybe the news that Mount Sinai has been found...." "Your explorations are fascinating. Your story is remarkable!"
The only hook line and sinker being swallowed here, is by those who turn away from the obvious truth. Even when the evidence is set before them, they will not consider it, or acknoledge it.

[queenannie]

Lets not be vague on this issue, it's not just stories we are arguing about here. It is the credibility of the bible. The truth is the facts supporting scripture are coming out. The only truth needed to support the scripture is found within it. i.e. John 14:6 *Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Not Ron Wyatt, not Moses, not Pharoah, not the Church fathers, and not the pope. Not by means of any proof. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

Most of the world does not want to hear these facts nor do they want a personal God. They want a God that looks the other way when they live a lifestyle the bible condems. I agree with that. They want a god they can look away from, more precisely. Therefore, don't you realize that until you tailor a god to allow them their comforts and attachments to the world, that there will always be a reason some people will give for not believing? If they don't believe, after they've had the opportunity to hear, what else can a person do? Why spend the rest of your time here tap dancing around a bunch of non-resolvable points of contention that will never be resolved anyway? If you somehow 'prove' the bible really happened, verbatim, are those with hardened hearts suddenly going to see the light? Just because you showed factual evidence? Is that going to make what it says any more true than it is, 'non proven'? Why try to convert the world to your line of thinking in a futile exercise which is just as much a distraction from your own spiritual affairs as greed and all worldly things can be? Who are you helping? Who are you hurting?

The world showed God how much they love truth when they nailed Him to a cross. Exactly. What makes you think they are going to love truth now, put forth in a less potent manner than He did? He didn't go around trying to 'prove' who He was or present any authority for his words other than He who sent Him. Period. He tried to keep Himself a secret as well, since He knew how fond this world is of truth. Example:Matthew 7:6 *Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. If someone earnestly desires to know Him, they will find the door to knock upon. Example: Matthew 15:26 *But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. Matthew 15:27 *And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

Recently two other men found their way to mount Sinai and came back with pictures and video recordings. They are telling the same story that Ron wyatt and his son told.So who's telling Jesus's story, the sake of which all these efforts at proof are supposedly for? To someone who already believes, they are just unnecessary, and to those who don't believe, they mean nothing. They never will, until there is first trust and faith used as salve for blind eyes.
National Geographic Television stated after viewing their pictures and videos, "This is a masterpiece of research and significance..a great piece of work and one of the most remarkable things that has happened of recent years." Sure it is, however, I say almost the same thing to myself each time I find a new enlightenment when reading the bible. Which is every single time I read it, and that is every day. I don't need National Geographic to back my claim, either.

"What could possibly upstage the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls? There was more than one discovery of valuble biblical texts found in like manner in the same area, 2 years prior, yet no one wants to read them or count them valid. The are just like the canonized bible, and the DSS, they are verifiable within themselves and alongside the other two. What richer discovery could there be than more of the words of Jesus?!? Why wouldn't they be the words of Jesus, and more truth? Because they weren't canonized by the early church? Who did that? Jesus? G-d? Or humans desiring to control their vast empire with the fear induced by forced ignorance of the truth. If they'd had their way, there'd be no reason to try to prove the bible, as they would be the only ones owning one. Fortunately, it's not that way, and we have no reason not to research it for our self.

The only hook line and sinker being swallowed here, is by those who turn away from the obvious truth. Even when the evidence is set before them, they will not consider it, or acknoledge it.What do you refer to as 'the obvious truth' in that sentence? I don't need evidence to recognize truth, and you shouldn't either. Maybe you're trying to find proof to bolster your own faith? Otherwise you'd stand firm upon the justification of that faith. But you'd rather place your justification in another person, or discoveries of physical evidence. That will never yield results.

What if your salvation was dependent upon G-d getting 5 references of your worthiness, from people that were both known by you and G-d, all of whom had already received the seal of approval in the same manner? How much would you believe, then? How likely do you think it would be to achieve salvation in that manner? G-d is supreme and divine, you say so yourself. Why do you require more stringent qualifications of his word than he does of your worthiness to receive such word?

More examples:Matthew 10:14 *And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

Mark 9:37 *Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.

Luke 18:17 *Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Little children don't ask for proof of the tooth fairy, grinches who steal christmas, or of the cow jumping over the moon. They just believe you because they love you and trust your love for them.

[campbell34]

The only truth needed to support the scripture is found within it. i.e. John 14:6 *Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Not Ron Wyatt, not Moses, not Pharoah, not the Church fathers, and not the pope. Not by means of any proof. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.

I agree with that. They want a god they can look away from, more precisely. Therefore, don't you realize that until you tailor a god to allow them their comforts and attachments to the world, that there will always be a reason some people will give for not believing? If they don't believe, after they've had the opportunity to hear, what else can a person do? Why spend the rest of your time here tap dancing around a bunch of non-resolvable points of contention that will never be resolved anyway? If you somehow 'prove' the bible really happened, verbatim, are those with hardened hearts suddenly going to see the light? Just because you showed factual evidence? Is that going to make what it says any more true than it is, 'non proven'? Why try to convert the world to your line of thinking in a futile exercise which is just as much a distraction from your own spiritual affairs as greed and all worldly things can be? Who are you helping? Who are you hurting?

Exactly. What makes you think they are going to love truth now, put forth in a less potent manner than He did? He didn't go around trying to 'prove' who He was or present any authority for his words other than He who sent Him. Period. He tried to keep Himself a secret as well, since He knew how fond this world is of truth. Example:Matthew 7:6 *Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. If someone earnestly desires to know Him, they will find the door to knock upon. Example: Matthew 15:26 *But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. Matthew 15:27 *And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.

So who's telling Jesus's story, the sake of which all these efforts at proof are supposedly for? To someone who already believes, they are just unnecessary, and to those who don't believe, they mean nothing. They never will, until there is first trust and faith used as salve for blind eyes.
Sure it is, however, I say almost the same thing to myself each time I find a new enlightenment when reading the bible. Which is every single time I read it, and that is every day. I don't need National Geographic to back my claim, either.

There was more than one discovery of valuble biblical texts found in like manner in the same area, 2 years prior, yet no one wants to read them or count them valid. The are just like the canonized bible, and the DSS, they are verifiable within themselves and alongside the other two. What richer discovery could there be than more of the words of Jesus?!? Why wouldn't they be the words of Jesus, and more truth? Because they weren't canonized by the early church? Who did that? Jesus? G-d? Or humans desiring to control their vast empire with the fear induced by forced ignorance of the truth. If they'd had their way, there'd be no reason to try to prove the bible, as they would be the only ones owning one. Fortunately, it's not that way, and we have no reason not to research it for our self.

What do you refer to as 'the obvious truth' in that sentence? I don't need evidence to recognize truth, and you shouldn't either. Maybe you're trying to find proof to bolster your own faith? Otherwise you'd stand firm upon the justification of that faith. But you'd rather place your justification in another person, or discoveries of physical evidence. That will never yield results.

What if your salvation was dependent upon G-d getting 5 references of your worthiness, from people that were both known by you and G-d, all of whom had already received the seal of approval in the same manner? How much would you believe, then? How likely do you think it would be to achieve salvation in that manner? G-d is supreme and divine, you say so yourself. Why do you require more stringent qualifications of his word than he does of your worthiness to receive such word?

More examples:Matthew 10:14 *And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

Mark 9:37 *Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.

Luke 18:17 *Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Little children don't ask for proof of the tooth fairy, grinches who steal christmas, or of the cow jumping over the moon. They just believe you because they love you and trust your love for them.
As a Christian, I care about a persons soul. If all I had was religion I would take the same jaded approach. I would casually walk down the street, and seeing a non christians house on fire I would say to myself, he had time to read his bible to bad for him let him burn. Yet, those who love the lord love these people. I can tell by the way some people speak, that they have religion but they don't have Jesus. Because when you have the Lord in your heart you go the extra mile to convince others that the bible is more than a story book. It really is the word of God. I remember years ago how I had told a friend of mine about Jesus and for years he rejected everything I said. Then one day God gave me something that would prove to him that the bible was true. The evidence so convinced him, that he gave his life to Christ, then his brother became a Christian, and right after that his sister became one to. Sometimes all it takes is a little evidence to change a heart. If I had taken the position that you don't believe well you can go to hell, they probably would of. The God of the bible has left proofs of it's validity which is turning hearts to Christ. Unfortunatly to many Christians ingnore these proofs and are allowing the world to slip deeper into darkness.

I don't need evidence to recognize truth?

Well good for you, but some people are convinced that the bible is true when presented with such evidence. So realizing there are people like this you would say forget them, and the evidence, let them burn, don't waste your time on them.
Well sorry, that's not my kind of Christianity. I will use what ever God gives me to win these precrious people to Christ.

Physical evidence that will never yield results?

Your wrong again, anytime you see evidence that is true it strengths your faith all the more. It's like the East gate in Jerusalem. It stands sealed just as the bible proclaimed it would. Just one more piece of evidence that builds and strengthen's the faith of the believer. Because it stands as a testament to God's truth. Only someone working against God would try to hide these facts.

[bandit28]

queenannie,

I understand what you are saying. I agree with you on that if a person calling himself a Christian needs to see these things with his own eyes to believe, then somethingwas missing from the beginging. Perhaps that is what some of these peopel are doing. However, I must agree with campbell in that we as Christians use all the tools God has given us to attempt to shed light on non believers. In our attempts to spread The Word we often find ourselves turned away because they do not want to believe what is written. With some non believers all that is needed is The Bible and someone to talk with them about it. To others, more is needed. So in that case, if you have something mentioned in The Book you love and cherrish come forth and able to be seen, then there are those non believers that will see it as truth and their lives will be changed forever.

Let me put this scenerio in front of you.

You are walking alone the road one day to the store. You come across a few people that notice you are carrying a Bible. They approach you and begin to ask you questions about how this and that are possible. Not to far away from you there stands a man listening in on the conversation. He to has these questions and is very curious but not in the ridaculing manners as the others. The few begin to question you on Noahs Ark and the possability of it all. They ask you about the dinosaurs and what happened to them. Because you do not have the worldly proof you need to exaplin to them, you are at a loss of words. They laugh at you and call you out as a fraud. You are not really bothered by this as your faith is stong in God. You decided to "turn the other cheeck" and go on about your shoping. However, at that same time, the man watching and listening has made up his mind that what he is seeking is not found here. He walks away with questions unanswered and eternity in Heaven lost.

Had you done the research outside of The Bible and yet use The Bible, you could have talked about the human remains found at the same level where dinosaurs are found. You could have mentioned that these dinosaurs were wiped out not by a huge meteor, but by a flood. So many things you could have proven to be right. In the end, they would make their decisions, and with hardened heart could have been like Pharoe and still denied God. However, just as Moses was instructed to try, so should you.

[queenannie]

As a Christian, I care about a persons soul. If all I had was religion I would take the same jaded approach. Are you saying my approach is jaded? Judge me not, just because you think you know where I am coming from and that what I say must mean what you would mean if you had said the things I did. I don't have any religion, religion is just politics and deception, designed to control the masses. I am the most unjaded that I've ever been in my life, but that's another topic.

I can tell by the way some people speak, that they have religion but they don't have Jesus. Because when you have the Lord in your heart you go the extra mile to convince others that the bible is more than a story book. More judgment. You don't know what's in my heart, and think because I don't think like you and speak like you that I don't have Jesus. You are a direct product of the world's religion, my friend, but you're too set in your own ideas to be receptive. You're not understanding what I'm saying. Does everything useful in instruction have to be 100% verified facts? In no way did I ever say the bible wasn't the word of G-d, I understand that more than you realize. Taking it as a storybook may be the best advice one could give another when they truly care. Maybe I should rephrase, and say a parable. The bible is a parable of parables, even the OT. That's the key to it. If I didn't care, do you think I'd be writing any of this? It's not like I have anything to prove, about myself or the bible, especially on this forum. Your view is narrow and your mind is set, so that makes you think I'm jaded and I don't have Jesus. I used to think just like you, with one difference: I wasn't bullheaded. When someone once told me the bible was allegory, instead of reacting, I responded and just filed it away, not believing but not rejecting. A short time later, I was reading some parable, and suddenly I saw something I hadn't before. I can't be specific, I can't remember. It was merely a slight slant to my understanding, which changed my comprehension, and a domino effect followed. When I compare myself with before that to after, I know I am not misguided. Your heart will tell you what's true, and it won't ask for proof. Same for everyone.
Sometimes all it takes is a little evidence to change a heart.How about an open mind? If I had taken the position that you don't believe well you can go to hell, they probably would of. Do you actually think it would be determined by your actions? Your actions are yours, your responsibilities are contained in your own sphere. I understand that I can't convert every non-believer into a believer. Idealists don't make good believers, you believe in everything just because you believe in something. Our jobs are to illuminate the path, and be an example to others through our lives, not be champions of the lost souls. That's another product of religion. It's also arrogant and not in your best interests. You're ignoring your own development. The God of the bible has left proofs of it's validity which is turning hearts to Christ. Unfortunatly to many Christians ingnore these proofs Actually, too many 'christians' ignore the upkeep of their faith. Most just pick a church or a doctrine, or adopt an understanding of what they perceive Jesus is all about, and then they're set, in stone. Somehow that constitutes 'faith' for most. That's bullheadedness, or in a biblical word, a hardened heart. The proof you seek to show others is actually for yourself, but you don't see that, either.

Matthew 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Did Jesus say we should heal them? No, we've got a big enough job to do already, just concerning ourselves.

Let's say this proof is really for the purpose you say. You convinced someone to believe in Jesus because you proved the bible was 'real' (what exactly do you mean by that anyway?), and you've done your christian duty. What happens when something happens in that person's life that overwhelms the actions of your 'proving', or that proof is somehow rendered no longer proof, due to mistaken research or some such potential human error? What's going to keep them firm? Not faith, because that was not the foundation in the first place. You're building castles on the sand of humanity instead of the rock of G-d! It's not your job to prove the bible, it's your job to testify as to your own faith. But you don't even understand what I mean.

Matthew 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.



Well good for you, but some people are convinced that the bible is true when presented with such evidence. So that makes it possible for them to have faith, because it's been shown to be true, since the bible speaks of it and you've proven the bible? That's not faith.

to be continued...

[queenannie]

Continued…

So realizing there are people like this you would say forget them, and the evidence, let them burn, don't waste your time on them. Where do you get these misunderstandings of what I say? No, what I'm saying is that if they don't thirst for it after it's introduced, you can't make them thirsty!!!!

John 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.

I wonder if you even read the bible seriously, because even literally, I would understand certain things Jesus said. You seem to just disregard the very words attributed to the living Word, for even if the bible is the word of G-d, Jesus is the Word.

Mark 8:18 Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not? and do ye not remember?

Well sorry, that's not my kind of Christianity. I will use what ever God gives me to win these precrious people to Christ. God didn't give you anything to 'win these precious people to Christ'--that's not your job! Are such a sage and learned christian that you have been assigned this duty for mankind? That's the same attitude Paul infected the church with, and it's called 'religion'. Jesus is the only source of true freedom, and it's not about control and conversion. It's a personal matter, not a mission for super christian.

Physical evidence that will never yield results? Not in spiritual matters, not on a permanent basis. Again, read the words of Jesus.

Your wrong again, anytime you see evidence that is true it strengths your faith all the more. It's like the East gate in Jerusalem. It stands sealed just as the bible proclaimed it would. Just one more piece of evidence that builds and strengthen's the faith of the believer. Because it stands as a testament to God's truth. Only someone working against God would try to hide these facts.Who's trying to hide these 'facts'? Facts are of the world. Truth is of the spirit. The evidence is within me, not found in the things I see with my eyes. I have eyes that see, not eyes that are blind. Nothing of the world is proof of G-d, except how it feels when you feel absolutely sure of what you say, without need to reference anything except the authority of G-d. Again, I say, read the bible that you're trying so hard to prove.

John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
13 The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.
14 Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.
...
17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.
18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.
19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.


Sure all the stuff in the OT happened, that's not proof of Jesus, at all. This kind of proof is actually misleading and dangerous for both you and your targets for conversion. Are you converting them to Judaism? Or Christianity? Do you realize the differences in leadership between the two? YHVH is not the Father Jesus speaks about, and maybe there's another source for all these things that deceive you into thinking you know what 'proof' is and what to do with it. Read the gospels carefully and you'll realize that not once does Jesus say his Father is the same god of the Pharisees and Sadducees, descended from Abraham.

34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord , Sit thou on my right hand,...
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ .

Now I'm assuming that you understand the subtle meaning in verse 34, The LORD said unto my Lord. LORD in all caps means the text originally said YHVH, this is a universal fact of all translations. We've got YHVH, Jesus, and G-d, all represented there. YHVH is not G-d! How many times does Jesus refer to the Father as LORD? Not once! In fact the only times in the four gospels, and Acts, that LORD is mentioned is Matthew 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, and Acts 2:34. All in the telling of this same story of David.
How can you prove anything or speak on the authority of G-d, when you don't even realize that the OT LORD and G-d, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, are not one in the same?!?!? Research it yourself, if you don't believe me. I wish you would. I'm trying to ruffle your feathers and upset you for a reason, not to prove that I'm right or that you're not, or that only I know what is truth and what isn't. I do not believe I am any more qualified to know truth than you are. I do believe in the truth, and I know that what has been revealed to me is available to all who seek truth through Jesus. That's why I say there's more to it than you realize, because there is. I wish you'd get riled up enough to check it out for yourself, even if to 'prove' me wrong. Whatever it takes to stir things up, because they're stagnant. And I know that you don't want that, I know that you truly love the Lord, just as I do. Not all love of G-d looks just like yours, or mine.

Read Luke 8:4-21.
Does that make any sense to you, in regard to what I am saying?

[queenannie]

Bandit, thank you for your views, I appreciate that you see what I mean. As well, I see what you are saying, but I can show you more about the example that you gave that might clarify what I'm trying to get across.So in that case, if you have something mentioned in The Book you love and cherrish come forth and able to be seen, then there are those non believers that will see it as truth and their lives will be changed forever.I couldn't agree with you more, and I do have that opportunity quite often, although not specifically with these questions. No one's ever presented me with the flood vs dinosaur thing (except my own self).

Here's my version of this scenario:

They approach you and begin to ask you questions about how this and that are possible. Not to far away from you there stands a man listening in on the conversation. He to has these questions and is very curious but not in the ridaculing manners as the others. The few begin to question you on Noahs Ark and the possability of it all. They ask you about the dinosaurs and what happened to them. Because you do not have the worldly proof you need to exaplin to them, you are at a loss of words. This is where it changes.

I wouldn't have the worldly proof with me, per se, but I do have facts in my head which I would gladly share, and I would say this:

“The extinction of the dinosaurs happened several billion years ago, this is verified by any short search into the history of mass extinctions, as also is the fact of the presence of hominids such as cro-magnon man, Neanderthal man, with the last known pre human hominid being a couple of million years ago. The fifth, and last mass extinction occurred about that time, as well as a significant climate change. So the earth was in essence starting over. Although in the canonized bible I carry, it says ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, and the earth was formless and empty…’ this is actually a result of a mistranslation from the Hebrew when the KJV was translated. There were only 3 Hebrew translators involved in that project, with two dying before it was finished, and none of the three were actually a Hebrew scholar. Now, I’m not a Hebrew Scholar, either, but I am learning Hebrew, and what I have learned, from scholars who understand the differences between the ancient Hebrew, the King’s English employed in the KJV, and our modern English language, is that much has been lost in translation, although there are some that would disagree. They are not interested in these subtle differences that are very important. There are bibles which can make it easier for a new believer to find the original meaning as recorded by the Hebrew Scribes. Anyway, what I’m getting at, is the original first lines of Genesis actually read ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth became waste, darkness was over the surface of the abyss, and the spirit of God was hovering over the waters.’ Now that’s congruent with the findings regarding past species on earth, including dinosaurs and hominids.
There are those that wish to say that the bible’s story of creation is the absolute creation of the earth, and therefore the earth is only around 6000 years old, because that’s the figure they arrive at from biblical accounts. The first known civilization, according to anthropology studies, was ancient Sumeria, in Mesopotamia (where Iraq is today). These people invented the wheel and also the cuneiform alphabet. This is also where Ur of the Chaldees was, where ‘father’ Abraham, that father of the jewish people, was originally from. This area is between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, and most biblical scholars claim that is where the Garden of Eden was. The history of the Sumerians has been traced back to about 6000 years ago. Scientists have found data supporting more than one flood, as many were caused by catastrophic earthly events. There is an opinion by some that the flood of Noah flooded just the Mediterranean basin, and this has been shown to have occurred. The world of man was still known to itself in that small area, and to the people then, that was the ‘world’. All civilizations dating from that time have a very similar flood story, as well as a creation story. Creation is not about the beginning of this planet. It’s been here far longer than we have. Creation refers to the origins of the race of humanity that now inhabits the Earth. So it seems that the regular scientists and the biblical scholars really don’t have any differences in opinion, just maybe different beliefs and a stubbornness which won’t allow them to see they are actually in agreement with one another.
As for me, I don’t take one over the other, as I see strengths and weaknesses in the theories of both, more possible when one isn’t taking sides. I don’t hold with the opinions and ideas of biblical scholars, just because they’re biblical and I believe in the bible. They are always seeking to prove things of G-d, found in the bible, in the worldly plane.
The bible isn’t about science, or scholars, or even interpretation, commentaries, preaching hell fire, and conversion of ‘sinners’. It’s about faith. It’s an extensive lesson book that can teach us about the confusing ways of the world, such as why it seems so evil, and it can also teach us about all the things we wonder about secretly within ourselves. The main lesson it is meant to teach us is that if we believe and trust in the things Jesus has said to us in regard to knowing He is the son of the one true G-d, and trusting that we contain a part of the eternal spirit of G-d within us, he tells us that we will be rewarded.
All it takes to have this reward is to believe we can have it, based on the trust we have in Jesus’s words of Truth. That is the only real source of truth anyone can find, because as you will find in learning what he’s said to you, you’ll see that the world is about greed and deception, because it is the realm of the devil, since the beginning of our current civilization, 6000 years ago. It’s also a place subject to death. Which brings me back to telling you of the reward we are promised. I’m sure you’ve heard people talk about eternal life in heaven. That’s one way of putting it, because as we all say, memories are all you have. But what happens when you die on this earth? If you believe there is nothing beyond, that is what you’ll get. That is actually the reality that is called ‘hell’ by those that don’t understand. Hell is not a fiery place of eternal torture, it’s more about darkness and nothingness. It is losing all your memories and sense of self. You get thrown back into the pool of humanity ‘raw materials’ and will return to earth, or another human realm, again, but you will not remember any of what you were before. You have to start over at the beginning, complete with human suffering like you've already experienced in this life, and you won’t even really be ‘you’ anymore, since all the soul material merges together in that ‘vat of creation’ from which souls are derived. Hell is darkness and unconsciousness, and loss of self and memories. In a sense you cease to exist, in the memory of time. Just know you’re not going to be in the fiery pits of Hell, ever. Even if you reject the truth of G-d, he still loves you, and would not subject you to such a cruel and merciless eternity. If you accept Him as the companion which he had in mind when each of us were created, you return to dwell in His realm, that most call Heaven. It is a place of light, love, and beauty. You are a slave to nothing such as we are in this world, and also you join that within you that’s not made of flesh (your soul) to G-d’s spirit as one. However, you will always retain your individuality, because you will keep all your precious memories of not only this life, but all lives you’ve lived the last 6000 years. You will still be you, but you will enjoy the total intoxication of that which is G-d, with never a tear or sad heart again, nothing negative will come upon you again, forever.”

How do you think this would affect both the people I'm speaking to, and the man overhearing?

[POPthree13]

Lets not be vague on this issue, it's not just stories we are arguing about here. It is the credibility of the bible. The truth is the facts supporting scripture are coming out. Most of the world does not want to hear these facts nor do they want a personal God. They want a God that looks the other way when they live a lifestyle the bible condems. Thats why some speak of God as an it. As if He was some force floating in space. God is not an it, He was fully human and He is fully God. I am not arguing the credibility of the bible I am arguing against a few intolerant, judgemental, know-it-alls who claim there interpetation of the bible is the one and only acceptable answer.
You think God has a dick? Well then how is 'it' any worse a pronoun than 'he'? Your homocentric view of God is not shared by all...

The world showed God how much they love truth when they nailed Him to a cross. That was Jesus I thought.. a part of the trinity liek God the father.

Recently two other men found their way to mount Sinai and came back with pictures and video recordings. They are telling the same story that Ron wyatt and his son told. National Geographic Television stated after viewing their pictures and videos, "This is a masterpiece of research and significance..a great piece of work and one of the most remarkable things that has happened of recent years." -Jack Hayford. Ian Reed, of Reuters News Agency "What could possibly upstage the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Maybe the news that Mount Sinai has been found...." "Your explorations are fascinating. Your story is remarkable!".I have refuted this video on another thread an need not repeat it here.

The only hook line and sinker being swallowed here, is by those who turn away from the obvious truth. Even when the evidence is set before them, they will not consider it, or acknoledge it.
YOUR truth is yours. Many share your OPINION. Many share mine.
Your condemnation smacks of the pharisees... Oh righteous Campbell teach me your truth because if I don't agree with you I must be lost! There are many ways of reading scripture and some look beyond the limelight of bible-thumping websites and documentaries to discover the true nature of god.

[campbell34]

Are you saying my approach is jaded? Judge me not, just because you think you know where I am coming from and that what I say must mean what you would mean if you had said the things I did. I don't have any religion, religion is just politics and deception, designed to control the masses. I am the most unjaded that I've ever been in my life, but that's another topic.

More judgment. You don't know what's in my heart, and think because I don't think like you and speak like you that I don't have Jesus. You are a direct product of the world's religion, my friend, but you're too set in your own ideas to be receptive. You're not understanding what I'm saying. Does everything useful in instruction have to be 100% verified facts? In no way did I ever say the bible wasn't the word of G-d, I understand that more than you realize. Taking it as a storybook may be the best advice one could give another when they truly care. Maybe I should rephrase, and say a parable. The bible is a parable of parables, even the OT. That's the key to it. If I didn't care, do you think I'd be writing any of this? It's not like I have anything to prove, about myself or the bible, especially on this forum. Your view is narrow and your mind is set, so that makes you think I'm jaded and I don't have Jesus. I used to think just like you, with one difference: I wasn't bullheaded. When someone once told me the bible was allegory, instead of reacting, I responded and just filed it away, not believing but not rejecting. A short time later, I was reading some parable, and suddenly I saw something I hadn't before. I can't be specific, I can't remember. It was merely a slight slant to my understanding, which changed my comprehension, and a domino effect followed. When I compare myself with before that to after, I know I am not misguided. Your heart will tell you what's true, and it won't ask for proof. Same for everyone.
How about an open mind? Do you actually think it would be determined by your actions? Your actions are yours, your responsibilities are contained in your own sphere. I understand that I can't convert every non-believer into a believer. Idealists don't make good believers, you believe in everything just because you believe in something. Our jobs are to illuminate the path, and be an example to others through our lives, not be champions of the lost souls. That's another product of religion. It's also arrogant and not in your best interests. You're ignoring your own development.Actually, too many 'christians' ignore the upkeep of their faith. Most just pick a church or a doctrine, or adopt an understanding of what they perceive Jesus is all about, and then they're set, in stone. Somehow that constitutes 'faith' for most. That's bullheadedness, or in a biblical word, a hardened heart. The proof you seek to show others is actually for yourself, but you don't see that, either.

Matthew 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

Did Jesus say we should heal them? No, we've got a big enough job to do already, just concerning ourselves.

Let's say this proof is really for the purpose you say. You convinced someone to believe in Jesus because you proved the bible was 'real' (what exactly do you mean by that anyway?), and you've done your christian duty. What happens when something happens in that person's life that overwhelms the actions of your 'proving', or that proof is somehow rendered no longer proof, due to mistaken research or some such potential human error? What's going to keep them firm? Not faith, because that was not the foundation in the first place. You're building castles on the sand of humanity instead of the rock of G-d! It's not your job to prove the bible, it's your job to testify as to your own faith. But you don't even understand what I mean.

Matthew 13:43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.



So that makes it possible for them to have faith, because it's been shown to be true, since the bible speaks of it and you've proven the bible? That's not faith.

to be continued...
No I don't know what is in your heart. All I know is what you verbalize on this post. And it appears to me you do not like to hear about the proofs of the bible. It also appears you are in opposition to some basic scriptural teachings.

Jesus preaches the great commision, telling us to preach the gospel to the world.
You say that's not my job.

You say that are heart will tell us the truth. The bible teaches us that the heart of man is desperatly wicked.

You say even if the bible is the word of God?

I don't need to know what is in your heart. My conclusions are based on the words you speak. Now I understand why you do not want to hear about the proofs of the bible. It's because you don't believe the stories in the bible. Any verifiable proof that would suggest that the stories are true would interfere with your generic belief system. The bible is either Gods perfect truth or it is a detestable lie. The Old Testament does not read as a parable, but as a history of the Jewish people. Parables do not even come in to play until you come to the New Testament, and then they are stated as such. My view may be narrow, but I have had wonderful success seeing many people come to the saving knoledge of Christ, proclaiming Him as their Lord and Saviour. That's the reason God has put us here. You say someone once told you the bible was allegory, well that person was wrong, and that is the same lie the devil tells everyone, only you believed it. Don't you see why you are repelled by the truths of the Bible. Because the discoveries today refutes the liar of liars. And he is this same liar that wants a fenced around mount sinia, and tried to get the moslems to break through the east gate in Jerusalem. He is trying to destroy the bible but God will not allow it. He tried to get Hitler to kill off the Jewish race which would also destroy the bible, but again God did not allow it. The Bible teaches us to resist the devil and he will flee from you.

[StonerBill]

i jsut popped in wihtout reading teh rest of this thread, but hitlers killing of the jews wouldnt get rid the the bible. Maybe the torah. But they wouldnt get rid of their pert of the torah (old testamnet). Hitler was working for god. The nazis praised god. Or wait, sorry were they actually jsut pretending, and really going home to praise satan?

everyhting bad is run by satan, everyhing good by god? doesnt that make us humans powerless, and meaningless pawns of god or satan's will?

And i expect another long post in reply, sonny!

[bandit28]

Yes, we are but pawns in God's ultimate plan. Why, does that make you feel small and useless?

Where on earth would you get the idea that Hitler was doing The Lords bidding? Come on man, seriously, pick up a book and read a little before you open your mouth and make a fool of yourself.

[StonerBill]

ill admit i was a little wrong there, i hadnt really looked into the situation i was only working off the only information i had been given in the past.

It seems hitler was actually an absolute hater of christianity.
However, he still beleived in christianity and the nazi party was still a christian movement. He jsut personally chose not to rpactice it in his personal time and actions. but that doesnt remove the fact that the nazi's were a christian movement and were dont 'in the name of our lord'.

I always have found hitler to be a very great and smart man, his obvious faults however, lying in his absolute immorality and bad ethics which are not good qualities. Of course now his angle is even more clearer to me, after a bit of reseach ive jsut done. hitler really was a great man.. his striving for perfection and lack of self control were perhaps the only things keeping him form being a very great leader...

anyway so whther he did oppose the practice of christianity, which could be seen as working for satan, whether satan actually controlled him or if the idea that an enemy's enemy is a friend applies, is anotehr issue.

oh and umm did you jsut agree that humans have no meaning but to fulfil god's motives?

[Dreampriest]

The Personal Equation of the Collective Conscience can be Comprehended best through the famous parable "The Tower of Babel" in Babylon of the Bible. If one translates the Holy Bible back into the original Greek and Hebrew, one is able to realize, when real literally, the Bible is just that of its title. "Holy" taken from the Greek word Hosios (phonetic spelling of the Greek pronunciation) is defined in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible as ". . .right (by intrinsic or divine character); hallowed"; coupled with the English definition of the New World Dictionary of the American Language, Second Edition: "regarded with or deserving deep respect; awe; reverence; or adoration". The word "bible" is derived from the Ecclesiastic Late Greek word Biblion which means "book". Our revised title of the Holy Bible read literally would be: a book regarded with deep respect, awe, reverence and adoration; hallowed. King James' version of possible fictional or factual historical events is much revered and adored; true, but still nothing more than a book. I could title this volume of essays Bible (however, its holiness could be disputed, if I chose, no difference would be apparent between mine and King James' save our perspectives, and maybe the copyright.

However, my point is not to argue reverence, but to demonstrate the Bible as being what it is: a book full of symbolism, grandiose imagery, parables, rumors and the like, and can be learnt from and knowledge profited as if one were reading any other work of Philosophy or Fiction. Having said this, I contend the theme behind the parable of Babel is not only one about a confusion of languages, but more of a confusion of consciences, or ways of thinking. Do not ways of thinking culture language as a means to communicate those ways of thinking to other like-thinking beings? In my point of view, the world [note: for the purpose of this writing, "World" refers to its original Latin meaning "Age of Man"; additionally, Age of Man includes individual personalities imbibed with consciences measured by personal experience within the environment of World] appears chaotic to the Conscience because the Conscience does not possess the ability to understand or comprehend a conscience external from itself. Individuality divided then re-integrated into a social whole at the voluntary loss of that individuality creates the Collective Conscience. The Collective Conscience is then sundered from the natural duality of the self-sufficient, -motivating, -willing, -propelling Self. The separate but unified Conscience sees the world through its lens. But this is not the extent of the Chaos the Conscience perceives. When the Conscience can not conform the world to its way of thinking Disorder of the Personality is born. The world does not "make sense" to the disordered personality as it futilely attempts to arrange the world to its Personal Equation. But this is not the only source of the perceived Chaos. When the conscience, or way of thinking, forces the world to comport to its realm of thinking and forces other consciences to see as it sees, in one and only one way, "My Way", Chaos is complete. Chaos manifests itself as Conflict caused by Resistance to that force. Collective Thinking attempts to compress Self-Thinking into its singularity then the enforcement of Collective Order is able to be owned, managed, and controlled easily, with little or no resistance. In effect, 'One God. One Country. One Nation. One People. One World.' becomes the motto of the Collective Conscience. In other words, One Conscience, One Way of Thinking. If this is what is seen as the symbolism behind Babel, that would make the world a symbol of Babylon.

The relationship of Chaos v Order accords the Collective Conscience; yes, but also breeds Xenophobia. The denial and refusal to accept any opposing view to the Collective, and the thirst for annihilation of any opposing view should it resists the Collective, is the means to bring order out of the Chaos, to rebuild the Tower of Babel, and reintegrate Conscience to a singularity by way of Force and Violence. But this is a perverted aspect of Global Thinking, for true Global Thinking encompasses the individual conscience before the Whole of Individual Conscience; if so, external conflict would be unnecessary when all are thinking globally, rather than globally thinking. One is oppressive, the other depressive (but liberating). Babylon is man-made and invented, therefore outside of Nature, even Supernatural, and the existence of any sense of Self becomes obliterated in the vacuum of the Global Self. This desire to delete the Self-Conscience is the Way of the Collective Conscience. The Collective Conscience is unshakable and beyond reproach or reason. The only way to bring about Global Dominion over Thought is to murder any resistance that does not adapt voluntarily, or can not be assimilated forcibly. Of course, this way of thinking exists in many realms, within many dimensions, each called a different name, but all performing the same atrocious act along the Collective Continuum, but it is the Xenophobe that implores the Resistor to ignore such affects of Global Dominion. To resist Global Dominion over Thought stays the Collective from the end of its Institution that it remains incomplete. The Collective Goal is to attain point B from point A regardless of obstructions between. The Resistor acts as obstruction to the Collective Goal, that of accomplishing point B. Within the Collective Conscience, point B means Global Domination, a harmonic Babylon (for in the thinking of the Xenophobe Disorder must be eradicated or Happiness so in pursuit of cannot be had by All until Disorder is no more upon Earth, and Xenophobe's fear conquered by global assimilation of Fear, the unionization of Fear and the Ambition towards Equality in Fear). The Resistant Conscience is obstinate to the linear equation "one plus one equals two" or A + B = C (or more accurately A ® B ® C ® Infinity) so denies the Xenophobe its Happiness or Relief from disjointed Fear. The Fear in the Xenophobe is never attaining the promised Happiness (and consequent release from Anxiety). But, if All were united in the Goal of point B, All could Fear collectively and retire to the benefits of Happiness in the absence of not Fear, but opponents to Fear; in turn, bringing about Happiness the Xenophobe all its lifetime has been in pursuit of and labored for. All would be Comrades, Companions, Brothers in Xenophobia. This idea would be best described as a grid upon a one-dimensional plane. This one-dimensional plane is the Global Conscience occupying all other planes, or Consciences, forcing all other planes to adhere to its dimension, producing multiple single dimensions, with all motion directed in precise fashion to the same end. In effect, a singularity with but one probable direction. Then the All, Global one-ness, a worldwide Babylon, could now as a unit face the fear of Universal Resistance. The Collective Conscience possesses a certain element of "racism", "separatism", "isolationism", and "segregation-ism" which likens the Babylonian Xenophobe to a virus, as it can only Fear, having no self-conscience. A Collective Conscience bound by Fear and Consumption of any resistance to its achievement of Freedom from Disordered Fear.

[Dreampriest]

However, Fear in and of itself acts as a destroyer; therefore, a race of beings motivated by Fear must eventually be consumed by Fear, bringing about its own destruction. For it cannot exist under the weight of its own gravitational mass without collapsing. It must grow, or die. Once the Collective goes Global, it has no place to grow save into the Universe, but the Universe is vast and unattainable by traditional means. Out of the ruins of this static arises the Omnipotent Preserver, which is neither Resistor nor Xenophobe. The Omnipotent Preserver superimposes Itself before both the Xenophobe and Resistor, that It becomes sole provider of means to perpetuate either Conscience, like acting as Global Parent to unruly children, while the full extent of Its intentions remain mysterious and unknown. The Global Parent is then Guide and Guardian by manipulating Conflict between the Xenophobe and Resistor creating a Circular Momentum, like the Event Horizon of a Black Hole -- as either Conscience would remain still, if not for the inertia of the Conflict. Conflict occurs because neither conscience has the capability to understand the position of the other. The position of the Xenophobe is that of demanding the attention of the Global Parent (symbolized by Sexual Intercourse with the Mother), and the position of the Resistor is that of seeking detachment from the Parent (symbolized by Murder of the Father). Both Consciences pursue a notion of Happiness, symbolized in Roman Catholicism as Assumption, or ascending to the Heavens to rejoin God. The Babylonian Conscience achieves Happiness through Absence of Resistance to Fear, and the Self-Conscience through the Absence of the Generation of Fear. The Omnipotent Preserver acts as Provider to both. The Global Parent being neutral supplies arbitrary information in an unbiased and unprejudiced medium in order to fit into any way of thinking. Either Conscience projects its Personal Equation onto that of the Global Parent. As ubiquitous Giver and Receiver of all information, the Global Parent is both Priest and Prophet to either Conscience as well as holds the ultimate result in manner of thinking. The position of the other Conscience is constantly displayed on the Theatre of the World by the Global Parent: Xenophobe represented as Warning to the Resistor of a Monster when one is compelled by Fear, and Resistor represented as Demonstration to the Xenophobe of insatiable need to eradicate Resistance to Global Fear. Both ways of thinking are similar in characteristic, habit, and personality; for the Collective Self is but an amalgamation of the Individual Self. If either did not exist, the other would continue in its manner of living, it is that the other brings out the True and Natural Instinctual Tendencies in the other, for better or worse. However, one is about Destruction and the other about Creation, a binary system of Conscience. The Global Parent marries the ways of thinking, symbolized by Revelations in the Bible. The word "revelation" means simply "to reveal" as defined by the original Greek word "apokalupsis" (from which the English word "Apocalypse" is derived): "disclosure :- appearing, coming, lighten, manifestation, be revealed, revelation." It is as if the Global Parent reveals the opposing side to each Conscience, like dancing reflections in a mirror. As omnipresent Supplier and Provider, Critic and Censor of all Information, the Global Parent holds Power over the Fate and Destination of each Conscience, as both consciences derives its way of thinking (about the other and the World about it) from the same fund of Information. In this way, the Global Parent is able to exact a form of control over possible futures or lifetime existence of either conscience, as well as the ability to reduce probabilities of either conscience to a pre-determined and manageable One. The Global Parent's intended result as It nurtures the maturation of Its children could be posited as Superconductivity of Conscience, albeit at the expense of the multiple dimensionality of the Grid, to a sort of Controlled Singularity or a Resolution of Singularity to negative or zero. There is absence of all probability and possibility, save that of the One controlled by Global Parent towards a single pre-determined Future destination. This is carried out through the institution of the Family Unit or the Global Family. By nurturing the natural tendency towards kinship already prevalent within the Conscience, the Family Unit becomes a departmental functionary of the Global Parent and a means to perpetuate the holistic idea of Equality in Fear and essential elements of Xenophobia. In the Family Unit, one is constantly faced with the moral choice "Adapt or Perish", or Comply to Global Conscience or Perish beneath it and symbolized by the Bible's Free Will of Man, yet Man must be obedient to God's Command or Suffer Punishment. The Xenophobe adores this, while the Resistor bears it.

The possibility to Depart the Global Family does, indeed, exist. The solution is to become Observer of the Global Parent, Collective Conscience, and the Self-Conscience, and, most important, all that is unwritten (therefore beyond the control of the Global Parent), like the Primordial Environment Matrix, provider of Terrestrial Information; thereby, all information is derived not from the Global Parent, or World. Rather than a Collective Conscience, Conscience is collected into a Truth through Intrinsic Experience. The Primordial Environment Matrix, or P.O.E.M., is Accuser of man-made Babylon, for it is not invented by the World, therefore, beyond its control, albeit subject of its Scrutiny. One would become Enemy of All, because one is outside of All, beyond the Reach of All, so threat to the Meaning of Life within All. It is an attack upon the Global Conscience and to the fulfillment of its Goal.

Thus we are brought to the advent of the Homo Novous, or New Man, a Fourth Dimension upon the Grid, symbolized in the Messiah, or second coming of Christ, who is beyond All, yet product of All in that Homo Novous borrows the best qualities of the Global interrelationship of three-dimensional Conflict upon the physical plane. The New Man does not suffer Salvation, Destruction, or Creation, but release from such entanglements of thinking, into the Realm of Free Thinking, a deliverance from the old pre-determined, reduced probabilities, to one of Possibilities Infinite; a balance, or the Amalgamation of All Possibilities and Probabilities. The New Man is then relieved of the Burden of Fear, the Incarceration from Fear, and the Manipulation of Fear. A sort of Superconductivity Continuum, which would cause the Obsolescence of the Supernatural Collective Conscience.

A new Factor becomes apparent, that of Intelligence and Intellect. The ability to Use the experience of the Conscience to learn new destinations and probabilities as they arise, symbolized by the idea of Paradise, the Return to Eden, and to a peaceful Eternity in Intellectual Co-Existence--Globally.

It may seem we have reached Conclusion to our Logical Exercise, but we have not even surpassed the limits of our own Existence, for once Homo Novous were customized and habituated by Use, Law of Conscience would eventually become a new Babylonian Way of Thinking, merely another layer of brick on the Tower of Babel. Perhaps, the lesson documented in King James' Version is that we remain trapped by our Ways of Thinking, and that the Omnipotent Preserver be neither Orwellian or Utopian, but simply Is, no more than Motion manifested on the worldly stage, and we are all victims of Its actions, participants us all.

We are Television and must be Applauded

[queenannie]

No I don't know what is in your heart. All I know is what you verbalize on this post. And it appears to me you do not like to hear about the proofs of the bible. It also appears you are in opposition to some basic scriptural teachings. No, Campbell, it appears you don't pay attention to what I say, you only pick out the parts that suit your side of the debate, ignoring the rest.

This is the deal: I don't need proof of the bible. I know without a doubt, 100% completely, no torture or any temptation would get me to change my heart, I know that THE BIBLE IS TRUTH. THE BIBLE IS TRUE. JESUS IS TRUTH. JESUS IS THE WORD. JESUS IS REAL. EVERYTHING HE SAYS IS THE TRUEST OF THE TRUE. The proof I have of that is called faith. I have a relationship with G-d built upon the rock of faith.

I'm not in opposition to some basic scriptural sayings. Don't spew out such accusations without some substantiation. I back up my statements with scripture, you never refer to the bible, yet you say I am in opposition to the teachings found therein. What you really mean, is that I don't interpret them the same as you. I don't interpret them at all, I listen to them, and Jesus reveals their meaning to me, completely. What does he say about why he talks in parables to the masses? Do you understand the meaning of each parable. Do you recognize a parable when it's not announced as parable?

Jesus preaches the great commision, telling us to preach the gospel to the world.
You say that's not my job.
The great commission, Matthew 28:19-20 happens to be my favorite. What it says is :
19 *Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 *Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Where does it say 'preach', where does it say 'prove'? Jesus did not tell you to go out and 'preach'. Me neither. Preaching and teaching are worlds apart in definition.

Have you ever baptized anyone?


You say that are heart will tell us the truth. The bible teaches us that the heart of man is desperatly wicked. Where does it say that, besides the book of Genesis, in the flood story? Show me, I'm from Missouri.

John 3:21 *But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

John 4:23 *But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

John 8:32 *And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

John 14:17 *Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 15:26 *¶But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:13 *Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

John 17:17 *¶Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

John 18:37 *Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Romans 9:1 *¶I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

2 Corinthians 11:10 *As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting in the regions of Achaia.

Ephesians 6:14 *Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;

Timothy 2:4 *Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Titus 1:14 *Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

1 John 3:19 *And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

1 John 4:6 *We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

1 John 5:6 *¶This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

These scriptures say, essentially, that despite being naturally wicked, man's heart can house the truth of G-d if he has received the spirit, has been saved. Are you saved, Campbell? Why don't you recognize or claim the Truth?


You say even if the bible is the word of God? Out of context! I said even if the bible is the word of G-d, JESUS IS THE WORD.

Do you only read the parts that fit your agenda! Don't insult my intelligence.

I don't need to know what is in your heart. My conclusions are based on the words you speak. Your conclusions are based on your own selective comprehension. Now I understand why you do not want to hear about the proofs of the bible. It's because you don't believe the stories in the bible. Sure I believe them. Who said I didn't? Again you're putting words in my mouth. Any verifiable proof that would suggest that the stories are true would interfere with your generic belief system. I don't have a belief 'system' I have faith in G-d and the truth of Jesus, the Word. The bible is either Gods perfect truth or it is a detestable lie. The Old Testament does not read as a parable, but as a history of the Jewish people. Then does that mean it is a detestable lie? What is the OT about? The Isrealites. Despite political development, Isreal is not synonymous with Jew. Jew is a much newer term that Israel. Parables do not even come in to play until you come to the New Testament, and then they are stated as such. My view may be narrow, but I have had wonderful success seeing many people come to the saving knoledge of Christ, proclaiming Him as their Lord and Saviour. That's the reason God has put us here. After we find the truth He has given us. You're not ready yet. Believe me.

Matthew 13:34 *All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

Mark 4:13 *And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?

Mark 4:34 *But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

John 10:6 *This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.


You say someone once told you the bible was allegory, well that person was wrong, and that is the same lie the devil tells everyone, only you believed it. Don't you see why you are repelled by the truths of the Bible. Because the discoveries today refutes the liar of liars. And he is this same liar that wants a fenced around mount sinia, and tried to get the moslems to break through the east gate in Jerusalem. He is trying to destroy the bible but God will not allow it. He tried to get Hitler to kill off the Jewish race which would also destroy the bible, but again God did not allow it. The Bible teaches us to resist the devil and he will flee from you. Do you not think I know that? Religion is a product of Satan, guaranteed, because it inhibits spiritual development. You are the poster child for this. Look up allegory in the dictionary. It doesn't say that allegory cannot be a factual story, at all. Allegory means that something either real or made-up, is used as an instructional tool to teach a difficult concept.

Galatians 4:21 ¶Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

[queenannie]

ill admit i was a little wrong there, i hadnt really looked into the situation i was only working off the only information i had been given in the past.

It seems hitler was actually an absolute hater of christianity.


oh and umm did you jsut agree that humans have no meaning but to fulfil god's motives?

Hitler was a pawn of the agenda of the elite ruling class in Europe at the time (now they're worldwide), a large portion of which were European Jews. These are the people who hated Christianity, but more than that, they love material riches and wealth. Look up 'red symphony' on your favorite search engine. Hint: it has nothing to do with music.

Hitler was fascinated with a spear in the musuem in Prague, I think it was. It was said to have been the spear that lanced the side of Jesus at the crucifixion. The first thing he did when the Nazi's invaded that city was go into the museum, and take that spear for himself. I think he had some sort of wierd obsession with Jesus and Christianity, but the main reason for his megalomania stems from an unhappy childhood with a mean stepfather and a mother whom he nursed as she died of breast cancer when he was not yet 20 years old. Add to that the failed ambition to be an artist, and you've got all the makings for a despot. Hitler was probably Jewish himself, and was fascinated with the Aryan genetic traits. It was more a denial of his own ethnicity than it was about Christian stuff, IMO.


Only humans have free will. Angels, and all other forms of humanity have no free will. The reason for free will is so that we can choose Christ, or we can reject him. That way all who receive the kingdom of heaven are there voluntarily, of their own choosing. G-d wants companions, that's why we're here, so that we realize what we have when we finally get to be with Him up there, in comparison to here in Hades. Yes, that's right. We live in the abyss. Read my post below, the long one, #73. That's why the world sucks, because it's not G-d's world, it is Satan's. The bible states that plainly enough. We must realize the glory that is G-d, before we receive the glory of heaven, otherwise, we'll make the same mistake as Satan, and think we are equal to G-d, and get kicked out. We're being spared the mistake of Satan by living in his neighborhood for a while.

Does that make any sense? That's one thing I'd rather learn not by my own mistake, for sure.

We feel like puppets because the world is evil and our hearts are good. Those that love the world have a place in it. Those that hate it have a place in heaven. I've never liked this place. It's superficial and plastic. Now I realize why. It seems real, but its an illusion and a place for evil to rule.

[Brocktoon]

Just me jumping into this thing with some thoughts....


Amazing to me when I see agnosticy leftiest types .. lol.. actual compare Hitler to Christianity or even 'Right Wing American' Christianity!?

Hitler was so many things that most of the liberal minded 'Hippies' of today would be VERY PROUD OF.

Hitler was a very staunch gun control advocate.

Hitler was a strong supporter and innovator in 'Liberal Theology' (many of the 'Higher Critisism and Liberal Theology he condoned is spoken by the 'Liberals' in these forums daily - most not realising where they get it from lol!)

Hitler was a commited Evolutionist and promoted the 'Science' zealously

Hitler was a believer in Occultism, Paganism and even Astrology.

Hitler was an Anti-Smoker by the way.. long before it was trendy too!

Hitler was educated at one of the worlds most 'Elite' Universities for that time. He was especially interested in the 'Liberal Arts' at which he excelled.

Hitler was a up-and-coming young Artist who was invited to many of the hot social parties and gatherings you could hope to 'be seen' at.

Hitler organised various young people (himself still younger too) and they decided to 'fight the power' and 'rage against the machine' with a new counter-culture political party aimed at breaking down the 'Old White Men' and their 'Old Traditions'.

LMAO.. It would be hilarious (if it wasnt so scary) at how many Liberal Arts Anti-Establishment, Pro Gun Control, Liberal Theology loving Young people dont even realise that HITLER WAS ONE OF THEM!

Just some thoughts for ya

[Brocktoon]

BTW.. for those of you who want to know 'my sources' on the preceeding info....


Mein Kampf by Adolph Hitler.

[StonerBill]

mein kampf is a very conflicting account. he says about the many liberal ideas he has but also his incredible nationilist pride. He may have had many liberal ideas, but nazi part was still an exrtreem right wing organisation. he put down christianity, yet he also spoke of huge love for lord and god and christ and teh church.


he was borna dn raised a catholic btw.

and ivefound sources that say that he beleived nohting in paganism and occultism, but borrowed ideals and used them in his political campaigning./ im not saying my souces are more correct, or less correct, its jsut showing that everyone can find different accounts.

[campbell34]

No, Campbell, it appears you don't pay attention to what I say, you only pick out the parts that suit your side of the debate, ignoring the rest.

This is the deal: I don't need proof of the bible. I know without a doubt, 100% completely, no torture or any temptation would get me to change my heart, I know that THE BIBLE IS TRUTH. THE BIBLE IS TRUE. JESUS IS TRUTH. JESUS IS THE WORD. JESUS IS REAL. EVERYTHING HE SAYS IS THE TRUEST OF THE TRUE. The proof I have of that is called faith. I have a relationship with G-d built upon the rock of faith.

I'm not in opposition to some basic scriptural sayings. Don't spew out such accusations without some substantiation. I back up my statements with scripture, you never refer to the bible, yet you say I am in opposition to the teachings found therein. What you really mean, is that I don't interpret them the same as you. I don't interpret them at all, I listen to them, and Jesus reveals their meaning to me, completely. What does he say about why he talks in parables to the masses? Do you understand the meaning of each parable. Do you recognize a parable when it's not announced as parable?


The great commission, Matthew 28:19-20 happens to be my favorite. What it says is :
19 *Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 *Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Where does it say 'preach', where does it say 'prove'? Jesus did not tell you to go out and 'preach'. Me neither. Preaching and teaching are worlds apart in definition.

Have you ever baptized anyone?


Where does it say that, besides the book of Genesis, in the flood story? Show me, I'm from Missouri.

John 3:21 *But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

John 4:23 *But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

John 8:32 *And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

John 14:17 *Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 15:26 *¶But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:13 *Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

John 17:17 *¶Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

John 18:37 *Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Romans 9:1 *¶I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

2 Corinthians 11:10 *As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting in the regions of Achaia.

Ephesians 6:14 *Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;

Timothy 2:4 *Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Titus 1:14 *Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

1 John 3:19 *And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

1 John 4:6 *We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

1 John 5:6 *¶This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

These scriptures say, essentially, that despite being naturally wicked, man's heart can house the truth of G-d if he has received the spirit, has been saved. Are you saved, Campbell? Why don't you recognize or claim the Truth?


Out of context! I said even if the bible is the word of G-d, JESUS IS THE WORD.

Do you only read the parts that fit your agenda! Don't insult my intelligence.

Your conclusions are based on your own selective comprehension. Sure I believe them. Who said I didn't? Again you're putting words in my mouth. I don't have a belief 'system' I have faith in G-d and the truth of Jesus, the Word. Then does that mean it is a detestable lie? What is the OT about? The Isrealites. Despite political development, Isreal is not synonymous with Jew. Jew is a much newer term that Israel. After we find the truth He has given us. You're not ready yet. Believe me.

Matthew 13:34 *All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

Mark 4:13 *And he said unto them, Know ye not this parable? and how then will ye know all parables?

Mark 4:34 *But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

John 10:6 *This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.


Do you not think I know that? Religion is a product of Satan, guaranteed, because it inhibits spiritual development. You are the poster child for this. Look up allegory in the dictionary. It doesn't say that allegory cannot be a factual story, at all. Allegory means that something either real or made-up, is used as an instructional tool to teach a difficult concept.

Galatians 4:21 ¶Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
Queenannie this is what you said here.
"This is the deal: I don't need proof of the bible. I know without a doubt, 100% completely, no torture or any temptation would get me to change my heart, I know that THE BIBLE IS TRUTH. THE BIBLE IS TRUE."

And this is what you said on your previous post.
"I believe, without a doubt, the canonized bible has been altered to suit the political agendas of man, namely the Jews and then the Catholics."

So on this post you say, "THE BIBLE IS TRUE." and on the last post you say, "the canonized bible has been altered " If the bible has been altered it is not true, if it is true it has not been altered. So which is it?

You stated that Jesus spoke in parables. I don't have any problem with Jesus doing that. My problem is that you claim that the whole bible is a parable and that is untrue. In your last post you stated, "the bible is a parable of parables even the O.T." You said you back up your statements with scripture. Could you give me a chapter and verse that states the Old Testament is written in parables?

So Mathew 28:19-20 happens to be your favorite.
Yes I should of used the word teach rather than preach, when you have been a Christian as long as I have, it is sometimes hard to differentiate between the two. According to webster's new collegiate dictionary, preach means to proclaim, and teach means to impart knowledge of. I believe preaching does spread knowledge and teaching results in the same.

You ask where does it say prove. Well you will find that in 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

I stated that the bible teaches that the heart is desperatly wicked.
And your responce was. "Where does it say that, besides the book of Genesis, in the flood story? Show me, I'm from Missouri." You will find this verse in Jeremiah17:9 which is a considerable time past the flood. "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can now it?"

The bible is either Gods pefect truth or it is a detestable lie. The Old Testament does not read as a parable, but as a history of the Jewish people.
Your responce. Then does that mean it is a detestable lie? If I believed as you have stated that the Old Testament was a parable then surly it would be a detestable lie. According to Webster's dictionary a parable is a short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle. The Bible is not a book of fabrications, the God that created the universe does not need to fabricate stories. Today we call the Isrealites Jews, but they are from the same race of people. God is bringing the Jews back to Israel, to lay a trap for the world. When the nations unite to push the Jews out of their land, God will rise up to shake the earth. This will be a day of terror, not of parables. God have mercy on those who do not know you in that day. The world today does not know the prophecies, they do not know what God has planned for
them. As the bible teaches, as it was in the days of Noah so shall it be in the last days.

[queenannie]

So on this post you say, "THE BIBLE IS TRUE." and on the last post you say, "the canonized bible has been altered " If the bible has been altered it is not true, if it is true it has not been altered. So which is it? What kind of deductive reasoning is that? It’s like saying ‘My mom had plastic surgery, and now she’s not my mom,’ when you really mean ‘My mom had plastic surgery, and now she doesn’t look like my mom.”

Here’s some contradictions that are farther from reconciliation than what you think I said (which BTW, is spelled out like this: The canonized bible has been altered, by man. The chief translator of the bible by the HRCC was ‘St.’ Jerome, read this: http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/JEROME.htm

Here’s another good site for general information on early ‘christianity’: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ch.htm You will find it says,‘The Church regards him as the greatest of all the doctors in clarifying the Divine Word.’ and ’ We have seen that already while at Rome he had made a revision of the current Latin New Testament, and of the Psalms.’ and ’In 1907 Pope Pius X entrusted to the Benedictine Order the office of restoring as far as possible the correct text of St. Jerome's Vulgate, which during fifteen centuries of use had naturally become altered in many places.’
Why would a direct translation from the original text ever need to be ‘revised’? Isn’t that essentially ‘revising’ the bible, itself? Have you ever compared two or more translations of the bible side by side, to compare the differences in random verses? There is a lot lost in the ‘revision’ of the KJV to the NIV, mainly from the differences in our english language. Are you familiar the the Hebrew language at all? Have you ever compared the English translations of the Torah to the Latin Vulgate OT? There’s no doubt there’s been unintentional alterations which affect literal meaning. Does that mean that the bible isn’t true?

Now I ask you, if the bible is literally true, without qualification, then why would Christians need the history and law of the Jewish people? Their laws no longer apply, we are told. Jesus pretty much tells the Pharisees and Sadducees that they have a father who is not His father, in other words, he’s saying that they are not children of G-d. Either you can take many statements from the Gospels, attributed to Jesus, and say yes, they are truly what he said, and whether you take them literally or figuratively, they pretty much say the same thing. So either you are faced with the problem of what Jesus said conflicts with the Jews being the Children of G-d as the Isrealites because He clearly says they are not children of His G-d, or you can reexamine your view that the bible is 100% true, unaltered, and to be taken literally unless specifically instructed that you are a reading a parable.
In your last post you stated, "the bible is a parable of parables even the O.T." You said you back up your statements with scripture. Could you give me a chapter and verse that states the Old Testament is written in parables?
Parable is defined as an allegorical relation, an analogy, in the dictionary, so same thing, basically. With that in mind, read Galatians 4: 22-31.

I don't have any problem with Jesus doing that. I’m sure He’d be relieved to know that you don’t disapprove of His methods.
My problem is that you claim that the whole bible is a parable and that is untrue.How do you know? You’ve shown me, without even realizing it, I’m sure, that you’re not all that familiar with the bible.

continued

[queenannie]

Yes I should of used the word teach rather than preach, when you have been a Christian as long as I have, it is sometimes hard to differentiate between the two.Okay, since you're obviously wanting to tell me, just how long have you been a Christian? --And I’m assuming you’re counting from the time you were baptized, right? How old were you? According to webster's new collegiate dictionary, preach means to proclaim, and teach means to impart knowledge of. I believe preaching does spread knowledge and teaching results in the same. So you do have a dictionary. It’s not doing you much good, because I don’t see how one can assume that proclaiming something is the same as imparting knowledge. Preach also says ‘to advocate by or as by preaching, urge strongly or persistently, or to deliver a sermon’, in my dictionary, which, BTW, is also Webster’s, New World in this case. In that same dictionary when I look up ‘teach’ I find that it is defined as ‘to show or help a person to learn (how) to do something, to give lessons to (a student, pupil, or class); guide the studies of; instruct, help someone to develop (a skill or trait), to give instruction as or in (a place). Oh, but I see you qualified that with ‘I believe’, which must mean it doesn’t matter what it says, if you believe otherwise? I guess the same holds true of the bible, but only for you, not me or anyone else?

You ask where does it say prove. Well you will find that in 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. In another translation that same verse says ‘. But examine all things; hold fast to what is good’, while the NIV says ‘Test everything, hold onto the good.’
Okay, we’ve got ‘prove’ and ‘examine’ and ‘test’. All very similar, but there are nuances of difference in those words. The original greek text is translated as ‘prove…’, so that is the one we’ll go with. Still, that’s not specific enough, prove what? All things. This is inclusive and not specific. To say this is telling you that you are to prove the truth of the bible to others is assuming. We can’t assume this or else we can assume many more things. Which do you prefer?

I stated that the bible teaches that the heart is desperatly wicked.And you give me examples from the OT, which was before Jesus came anyway, after which we are told that when the spirit is within our hearts no longer is it evil or wicked. I don’t know about anyone else, but my heart is not wicked, and hasn’t been as long as I can remember, since I have more evidence in my life for the presence of the spirit, than I do for wickedness. And you can’t serve two masters."The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can now it?" What does it say about after Jesus leaves us the Holy Spirit?
The New Testament makes the OT not applicable to Christians, only Jews, right? And Jesus said that His Father is not the Father of the Jews. Now, he didn’t preface those statements by any qualifier. So we know what He says is true. Therefore, how is proof of the goings-on of the Jewish people suitable for a Christian to use when witnessing that Jesus is the Son of G-d, backed up by the written word of G-d, the bible, which is definitely true, because you can prove it by showing that the Jews existed and the did cross the red sea. In the bible we also find that the Pharisees told Jesus that he was not their messiah, they knew of no messiah coming from the land of Galilee from their scriptures and prophesies, yet Jesus tells us he is the fulfillment of such prophesies, such as in the book of Isaiah. Now that’s conflicting, and to say that the bible is 100% true and to be taken literally only in its use for our instruction, presents an ever bigger conflict in regard to the belief system you have faith in.

Do you see where I’m going with this? Your reasoning is not only assumptive, it’s faulty and self contradicting.

According to Webster's dictionary a parable is a short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.It does? Mine doesn’t say anything about fictitious, it says ‘a story in which people, things, and happenings have a hidden or symbolic meaning: allegories are used for teaching or explaining ideas, moral principles, etc., the presenting of ideas by means of such stories, and any symbol or emblem.’ I have a Webster’s, too. Any dictionary I’ve ever looked that word up in has never said that allegory also defined something as being fiction. Can you prove that your dictionary is true? I can’t. Let’s go to a online dictionary. How about dictionary.com (http://www.yourdictionary.com/ ) ?
I’ll make it easy for you:
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/a/a0207600.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0620700.html
Http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0505800.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0505800.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/t/t0393300.html


Today we call the Isrealites Jews, but they are from the same race of people.Okay, the Isrealites are G-d’s chosen, who became the Jews, who mobbed on Pilate to crucify Christ per the bible, who they say was not their Messiah, although Christ says different. Now, someone is lying—who is it? Or is the bible untrue? God is bringing the Jews back to Israel, to lay a trap for the world. When the nations unite to push the Jews out of their land, God will rise up to shake the earth. Why?-- in a grand gesture of ‘thank you for killing my only son in a barbaric and humiliating fashion in the grossest display of ingratitude man’s ever seen?’ That is the biggest contradiction in the bible, that the Jews are still gods chosen people, which can’t be true of either the OT or NT, if you read it as literal, or even symbolically, for that matter. This will be a day of terror, not of parables. For whom? Are you Jewish? Where do you fit into all this? Is G-d going to lay a trap for you? Who, then? The Christians who believe in the Christ He sent? That the jews say believe in a lie in regard to Christ? God have mercy on those who do not know you in that day. What? On those that don’t know me, as in Annie? What does this refer to? The world today does not know the prophecies, they do not know what God has planned for them. As the bible teaches, as it was in the days of Noah so shall it be in the last days.I agree, totally. But do you understand them? So when would you say the last days will be here? How will we know?


I said the bible is Truth, and I hold to that. As well, it has been altered. I also said that it's not a literal historical account, and I hold to that, too. Can you prove every single thing in the bible without your proof in one passage conflicting with what's said in another, not to mention in the worldly means such as scientific findings? Can you prove it's true according to your own standards of truth and proof, which mine obviously don't measure up to any more than your own do? At least my beliefs and reasonings are consistent with themselves, as well as the bible and the words of Jesus, which are also found to be consistent in this mode of application.

Is the bible, then true by the standards of the world or of the kingdom of G-d?

[campbell34]

What kind of deductive reasoning is that? It’s like saying ‘My mom had plastic surgery, and now she’s not my mom,’ when you really mean ‘My mom had plastic surgery, and now she doesn’t look like my mom.”

Here’s some contradictions that are farther from reconciliation than what you think I said (which BTW, is spelled out like this: The canonized bible has been altered, by man. The chief translator of the bible by the HRCC was ‘St.’ Jerome, read this: http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/JEROME.htm

Here’s another good site for general information on early ‘christianity’: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ch.htm You will find it says,‘The Church regards him as the greatest of all the doctors in clarifying the Divine Word.’ and ’ We have seen that already while at Rome he had made a revision of the current Latin New Testament, and of the Psalms.’ and ’In 1907 Pope Pius X entrusted to the Benedictine Order the office of restoring as far as possible the correct text of St. Jerome's Vulgate, which during fifteen centuries of use had naturally become altered in many places.’
Why would a direct translation from the original text ever need to be ‘revised’? Isn’t that essentially ‘revising’ the bible, itself? Have you ever compared two or more translations of the bible side by side, to compare the differences in random verses? There is a lot lost in the ‘revision’ of the KJV to the NIV, mainly from the differences in our english language. Are you familiar the the Hebrew language at all? Have you ever compared the English translations of the Torah to the Latin Vulgate OT? There’s no doubt there’s been unintentional alterations which affect literal meaning. Does that mean that the bible isn’t true?

Now I ask you, if the bible is literally true, without qualification, then why would Christians need the history and law of the Jewish people? Their laws no longer apply, we are told. Jesus pretty much tells the Pharisees and Sadducees that they have a father who is not His father, in other words, he’s saying that they are not children of G-d. Either you can take many statements from the Gospels, attributed to Jesus, and say yes, they are truly what he said, and whether you take them literally or figuratively, they pretty much say the same thing. So either you are faced with the problem of what Jesus said conflicts with the Jews being the Children of G-d as the Isrealites because He clearly says they are not children of His G-d, or you can reexamine your view that the bible is 100% true, unaltered, and to be taken literally unless specifically instructed that you are a reading a parable.
Parable is defined as an allegorical relation, an analogy, in the dictionary, so same thing, basically. With that in mind, read Galatians 4: 22-31.

I’m sure He’d be relieved to know that you don’t disapprove of His methods.
How do you know? You’ve shown me, without even realizing it, I’m sure, that you’re not all that familiar with the bible.

continued
What kind of deductive reasoning is that?

It is the deductive reasoning that if the bible has been changed, how would one know that what he is reading was not part of that change? Who is to say what is right or what is wrong. And who is to determine the extent of those changes. Suggesting the bible has been altered sounds sinister. I believe the bible has been translated into other languages, yet the integrity of the scriptures has remained intact.


Now I ask you if the bible is literally true, withour qualification, then why would Christians need the history and law of the Jewish people?

1 Corinthians chapter 10,1 to 6. Paul states that the bible stories were our examples, that point out to the Christians how not to live.

Luke 24:44 Jesus said everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the law of Moses, the prophets and the psalms.


Their laws no longer apply, we are told.

Matthew 5:17-19 Jesus never said the law does not apply. He said he came not to destroy the law, or the prophets, but to fulfil.

Jesus pretty much tells the Pharisees and Sadducees that they have a father who is not His father, in other words, he's saying that they are not children of God.

Where did u ever get the idea that the bible states that the Jews were the children of God? The Jews were the race that God picked to do his bidding, but that was it. No where in the bible does it state that the Jews were the children of God. When Jesus told them they have a father who is not His father he spoke correctly. The bible clearly teaches that even though the Jews were Gods hand picked people, few of them will be saved because they rejected Gods blood sacrifice.


I don't see how one can assume that proclaiming something is the same as imparting knowledge.

1. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary. Proclaim- Bearer of news.
2. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary. News---- New information of any kind.
3. Webster"s Revised Unabridged Dictionary. Information-Knowledge derived from study experience, or instruction.

And that is how one can assume. It's called a logical conclusion.


Prove all things. Still, that's not specific enought, prove what? All things. This is inclusive and not specific.

It should be obvious, that when the bible states we should prove all things it is telling us not to take everything at face value. The religions of the world depend totally on blind faith. Christians should not only have faith but should be fortified with knoweledge. Wise men lay up knoweledge. Pr. 10,14

[campbell34]

Okay, since you're obviously wanting to tell me, just how long have you been a Christian? --And I’m assuming you’re counting from the time you were baptized, right? How old were you? So you do have a dictionary. It’s not doing you much good, because I don’t see how one can assume that proclaiming something is the same as imparting knowledge. Preach also says ‘to advocate by or as by preaching, urge strongly or persistently, or to deliver a sermon’, in my dictionary, which, BTW, is also Webster’s, New World in this case. In that same dictionary when I look up ‘teach’ I find that it is defined as ‘to show or help a person to learn (how) to do something, to give lessons to (a student, pupil, or class); guide the studies of; instruct, help someone to develop (a skill or trait), to give instruction as or in (a place). Oh, but I see you qualified that with ‘I believe’, which must mean it doesn’t matter what it says, if you believe otherwise? I guess the same holds true of the bible, but only for you, not me or anyone else?

In another translation that same verse says ‘. But examine all things; hold fast to what is good’, while the NIV says ‘Test everything, hold onto the good.’
Okay, we’ve got ‘prove’ and ‘examine’ and ‘test’. All very similar, but there are nuances of difference in those words. The original greek text is translated as ‘prove…’, so that is the one we’ll go with. Still, that’s not specific enough, prove what? All things. This is inclusive and not specific. To say this is telling you that you are to prove the truth of the bible to others is assuming. We can’t assume this or else we can assume many more things. Which do you prefer?

And you give me examples from the OT, which was before Jesus came anyway, after which we are told that when the spirit is within our hearts no longer is it evil or wicked. I don’t know about anyone else, but my heart is not wicked, and hasn’t been as long as I can remember, since I have more evidence in my life for the presence of the spirit, than I do for wickedness. And you can’t serve two masters. What does it say about after Jesus leaves us the Holy Spirit?
The New Testament makes the OT not applicable to Christians, only Jews, right? And Jesus said that His Father is not the Father of the Jews. Now, he didn’t preface those statements by any qualifier. So we know what He says is true. Therefore, how is proof of the goings-on of the Jewish people suitable for a Christian to use when witnessing that Jesus is the Son of G-d, backed up by the written word of G-d, the bible, which is definitely true, because you can prove it by showing that the Jews existed and the did cross the red sea. In the bible we also find that the Pharisees told Jesus that he was not their messiah, they knew of no messiah coming from the land of Galilee from their scriptures and prophesies, yet Jesus tells us he is the fulfillment of such prophesies, such as in the book of Isaiah. Now that’s conflicting, and to say that the bible is 100% true and to be taken literally only in its use for our instruction, presents an ever bigger conflict in regard to the belief system you have faith in.

Do you see where I’m going with this? Your reasoning is not only assumptive, it’s faulty and self contradicting.

It does? Mine doesn’t say anything about fictitious, it says ‘a story in which people, things, and happenings have a hidden or symbolic meaning: allegories are used for teaching or explaining ideas, moral principles, etc., the presenting of ideas by means of such stories, and any symbol or emblem.’ I have a Webster’s, too. Any dictionary I’ve ever looked that word up in has never said that allegory also defined something as being fiction. Can you prove that your dictionary is true? I can’t. Let’s go to a online dictionary. How about dictionary.com (http://www.yourdictionary.com/) ?
I’ll make it easy for you:
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/a/a0207600.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0620700.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0505800.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/p/p0505800.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/t/t0393300.html


Okay, the Isrealites are G-d’s chosen, who became the Jews, who mobbed on Pilate to crucify Christ per the bible, who they say was not their Messiah, although Christ says different. Now, someone is lying—who is it? Or is the bible untrue? Why?-- in a grand gesture of ‘thank you for killing my only son in a barbaric and humiliating fashion in the grossest display of ingratitude man’s ever seen?’ That is the biggest contradiction in the bible, that the Jews are still gods chosen people, which can’t be true of either the OT or NT, if you read it as literal, or even symbolically, for that matter. For whom? Are you Jewish? Where do you fit into all this? Is G-d going to lay a trap for you? Who, then? The Christians who believe in the Christ He sent? That the jews say believe in a lie in regard to Christ? What? On those that don’t know me, as in Annie? What does this refer to? I agree, totally. But do you understand them? So when would you say the last days will be here? How will we know?


I said the bible is Truth, and I hold to that. As well, it has been altered. I also said that it's not a literal historical account, and I hold to that, too. Can you prove every single thing in the bible without your proof in one passage conflicting with what's said in another, not to mention in the worldly means such as scientific findings? Can you prove it's true according to your own standards of truth and proof, which mine obviously don't measure up to any more than your own do? At least my beliefs and reasonings are consistent with themselves, as well as the bible and the words of Jesus, which are also found to be consistent in this mode of application.

Is the bible, then true by the standards of the world or of the kingdom of G-d?
Could you give me a chapter and verse that states the Old Testament is written in Parables?

Abraham had two sons one by a bondmaid the other by a freewoman. The verse askes the question, which things are an allegory? In the text we see how Abraham's sons symbolically represent the two covenants.
Which I understand.
Yet because of this one verse, you now conclude that the entire Old Testament is a parable?

The Jews, God's people.
It was prophisied that the Jews would reject Christ when He came. God states that in the latter days He would bring the Jews back to the land that He gave them, Israel. He said he was not doing it for their sakes. In the Old Testament, God said where ever the Jews wandered they polluted My name. God stated He would return them to Israel when He was ready to reveal Himself to the world. God's entrance into our evil world, will trigger such cataclysmic events, that it will bring earth to the edge of extinction. God is not allowing the Jews to return just for the purpose of a homeland. He is doing this to infuriate the nations. When God's judgement falls, everyone who is covered by the blood of Christ will be rescued by God's holy angles. Everyone who has been truly born again, will receive God's protection. Those who donot know God will be left behind. God will demonstrate His power in the years ahead, when the nations try to end the controversy with the Jews. They will try to destroy the State of Israel. God will not forget His promise to the Jewish people, and He will not allow it. Not since the time of Pharaoh has God worked in such ways. With the real church gone, the man of sin will then be revealed. In that day, earth will become like hell. Gods second coming will be 7 years away.

[queenannie]

It is the deductive reasoning that if the bible has been changed, how would one know that what he is reading was not part of that change? Who is to say what is right or what is wrong. And who is to determine the extent of those changes. Suggesting the bible has been altered sounds sinister. I believe the bible has been translated into other languages, yet the integrity of the scriptures has remained intact.
You believe some things, but must prove other things less important. Is it more important to believe that the red sea parted for the israelites, and drowned the Pharoah's army than it is to know the words originally used when the first biblical texts were put down by the scribes? One little change such a different word being substituted due to changing semantics can make quite a bit of difference. Especially in regard to names among others. Like spirit vs. wind. vs. breath.

Have you studied the Hebrew or Greek languages, or the Hebrew culture at all? There is a lot more to be learned there about the truth of the bible than archeology.




Matthew 5:17-19 Jesus never said the law does not apply. He said he came not to destroy the law, or the prophets, but to fulfil. We don't have to destroy a law not be subjected to it ourselves.
Jesus also said On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.Matthew 22:40

Where did u ever get the idea that the bible states that the Jews were the children of God? The Jews were the race that God picked to do his bidding, but that was it. No where in the bible does it state that the Jews were the children of God. [quote]Ye are the children of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.Deuteronomy 14:1
Of course that says not what it seems, since it should read YHVH your God.
Anyway, I apologize for that one, I thought you had said something to that effect, but I see I was wrong. I'm sorry--scratch that since there's actually something we agree on!


[quote]
It should be obvious, that when the bible states we should prove all things it is telling us not to take everything at face value. The religions of the world depend totally on blind faith. Christians should not only have faith but should be fortified with knoweledge. Wise men lay up knoweledge. Pr. 10,14Well, then, you don't mean it's telling you to prove the events of the OT? That was the initial reference to the verse, remember?

[queenannie]

Could you give me a chapter and verse that states the Old Testament is written in Parables?

Abraham had two sons one by a bondmaid the other by a freewoman. The verse askes the question, which things are an allegory? In the text we see how Abraham's sons symbolically represent the two covenants.
Which I understand.
Yet because of this one verse, you now conclude that the entire Old Testament is a parable? No, because in that reference, if you can see the symbolism, then you can see it throughout the entire bible

The Jews, God's people.
It was prophisied that the Jews would reject Christ when He came. God states that in the latter days He would bring the Jews back to the land that He gave them, Israel. He said he was not doing it for their sakes.

Where???

In the Old Testament, God said where ever the Jews wandered they polluted My name. God stated He would return them to Israel when He was ready to reveal Himself to the world. God's entrance into our evil world, will trigger such cataclysmic events, that it will bring earth to the edge of extinction. God is not allowing the Jews to return just for the purpose of a homeland. He is doing this to infuriate the nations. When God's judgement falls, everyone who is covered by the blood of Christ will be rescued by God's holy angles. Everyone who has been truly born again, will receive God's protection. Those who donot know God will be left behind. God will demonstrate His power in the years ahead, when the nations try to end the controversy with the Jews. They will try to destroy the State of Israel. God will not forget His promise to the Jewish people, and He will not allow it. Not since the time of Pharaoh has God worked in such ways. With the real church gone, the man of sin will then be revealed. In that day, earth will become like hell. Gods second coming will be 7 years away.It's not about 7 years! That's just the main interpretation. If everyone would stop being so literal and egocentric with respect the modern man, it would be understood. What's the 'real' church?

Who did god make the promise to? The jews or the isrealites? Do you think they are the one in the same? Isreal is not a land, nation, or place, it is a people! And it is not the jews. There were no such thing as jews when god gave that promise to Abraham, and Jacob, and then again to the isrealites at the time of the exodus. Jews didn't exist until the tribes split up.
The paragraph above does not make sense with what is said all throughout the bible, OT and NT. Unless you're selective I guess, in taking some of it as symbology and some of it literally. That's nothing but confusion. That really confuses the issue of the jews vs gentiles as far as the reason Jesus was said to have come here.

[Sign Related]

There is some truth found in the gospel books. But there are some lies in there as well. The rest of the books to the bible are by far some crafty lieing with an obviuos intent to decieve. I say don't let the deception control your life.

[Genesis]

well as it was written by people and passed down and much of what has been omitted will never be seen...we can to an extent assume that at least 40% is false or inconclusive.


but much has been proved...the existance of jesus,the opening of the sea at moses feet...or at least the splitting of the sea

scientists have proved all of it bar the "stories"that are only supposed to be symbolic.

yes much of it may seem far fetched and what not but i'd say a good 60% of it is true.

the rest is up to faith.

some people think its far fetched because the demands of the faith were very great[hooj] and hard....they are not in fact. they are not demands but acts od devotion and self disciplin and the strive to decency which is expected of humanity as a species regardless of ethos. they are only great to those who do not follow them. to christians they are what is expected. that does not render it otiose in anyway.


anyway...as i said its not 100% because its a spiritual book. it can't be fully proved till we are seated at the right hand of the father laughing at all those people who give out about our book.

[StonerBill]

I missed where they proved that the sea parted for moses, is that furhter back in this thread?

[JesusDiedForU]

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

-1 Timothy 4:3,4

You guys fit this verse quite well except you must not have very good teachers or you don't have very good sources because all you write are vague statements.

Prove the Archaeologic, Scientific, and Prophetic proof wrong but that will never happen because you guys seem to say is the Bible is stuff like this:

"scientists have proved all of it bar the "stories"that are only supposed to be symbolic."

ok... show me where...

"we can to an extent assume that at least 40% is false or inconclusive."

40% ay? Where did you get that? Your own study?

Guys if you are going to talk negative about the Bible please know or some what know what you are talking about.

[Brocktoon]

I too would be interested to see the evidence for these startling conclusions.

50% is 'proven false'?
The 'Other Books' outside the Gospel are full of lies?
Science has something to do with this, huh?

Let me guess - you read somewhere on the internet that it was 'a known fact' that Romans changed all the scriptures to glorify themselves?
Or..
You read a book saying Jesus was Buddha or married with children?

[Genesis]

I missed where they proved that the sea parted for moses, is that furhter back in this thread?

no not in this thread at all.


a year or two ago i watched a documentary on the "prince of egypt" thing. and they had studied the concept of the sea splitting. it was found that the possibility of it ever happening was in fact very large because similar displays of a tide pulling back and retreating from the shore were like that of a tsunami but there was only one possibility for that happening and the onle tidal wave that could have been caused was by a volcano a few hundred miles away by sea however on searching the aparent place that the sea split they found volcanic rock that was as old as the time when the river splitting ooccured and it also had to have been carried by sea to get to the area...so they figured the force of the volcano could actually have set off the tidal wave and as time went on would have built momentum and what not [i assume thats how it got so big cos i actually can't remember what he said but something about speed increase and then the increase of size i think]. eventually upon reaching the banks the wave would have had to pull the sea back providing safe passage onto what is actually now an island and would have been a safe distance for them to travel.




sounds a bit farfetched and the piece of volcanic rock was a result of the volcanic erruption that did happen thousands of years ago around the same time moses freed the slaves...but it really could have been coincidence. ad could have had no impact on the sea but it would explaine a hell of a lot about that whole thing.


but i figure is really is possibility and yes the documentry does exist but i don't remember the name of it...i think it was on during some jesus week on discovery and im not sure how accurate they are.

its all down to a matter of faith i suppose until they prove it 100% tho.



and now to the rest which i assume directed at me.



and the 40% was in fact a random number. being a believer in the majority [hence the choice of statistic that first came to mind for sake of point] of the bible doesn't mean that i am pretentious enough to think i know everything about it thank you very much. i think it has as many loose ends as the believers and non-believers claims to proof and disproof alike. the thing that assures it in my eyes though is my belief in the existance of god which was perpetuated by the existance of jesus.whom they have proven to exist through countless documentries. the only thing no-one has proved is in fact the existance of god. and that's the divide. and why can't we prove he is real? because we cannot prove he isn't. until the day we do...it all comes down to faith. some have it some don't but demanding proof of a book that derives from "divine intervention" will get no-one nowhere fast.



and by the way the 60% i refer to is nothing to do with the divinity aspect but the actual story and prophecy and the ability for humans to mishandle truths to manipulate others and the fact that much has been ommitted.

however if in fact one could statistically "prove" the bible was mostly lies...which they can't i'd be all ears.i never offered it as truth because i can't. neither could you. that would be just as pretentious, but as a belief i feel some of the bible has some sketchy parts on reading it. that doesn't mean i know nothing about it.it does mean however i am willing to learn but until i learn EVERYTHING i can only offer opinion on that which i do understand and that which i have studied.i have only found my faith since i was 17 so i will admit i might not know as much as you who has probably been a christian all their lives.but we can only be expected to judge within what we understand. when we understand more...our minds open more to possibilities.which is where others come in and help and not criticse how we know nothing and i think one knows the implications of that.

and whats wrong with sayin you can't prove symbolic stories to be truth? i don't believe they're truth.but i thought thats the point. that they're just an interpretation of truth. doesn't mean the symbolism should be discounted at all. and only a small few are symbolic like for example...and to be cliché and obvious,the whole garden of eden thing being symbolic of temptation and the outcome of sucuming to it.


but i do agree on that thing about our teachers though.our teachers do not teach religion over here in indepth ways because a lot of schools are non-denominational so its not really required.or we have have pathetic teachers who are awarded their profession on the basis of being christian. they can't offer a class much in the way of teaching because most of them can't really explaine anything.offering answers like..because i said so really doesn't suffice for me.


maybe documentries on the bible and the proof of the stories of the bible aren't the way to go...then again...if they are not...and the professionals are not to be trusted what is?


*hears answer of "the bible" being played out *:rolleyes:


and btw...all you guys? im a bloody christian thank you very much if you were impluying otherwise.

[campbell34]

You believe some things, but must prove other things less important. Is it more important to believe that the red sea parted for the israelites, and drowned the Pharoah's army than it is to know the words originally used when the first biblical texts were put down by the scribes? One little change such a different word being substituted due to changing semantics can make quite a bit of difference. Especially in regard to names among others. Like spirit vs. wind. vs. breath.

Have you studied the Hebrew or Greek languages, or the Hebrew culture at all? There is a lot more to be learned there about the truth of the bible than archeology.



We don't have to destroy a law not be subjected to it ourselves.
Jesus also said On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.Matthew 22:40
[quote]
Where did u ever get the idea that the bible states that the Jews were the children of God? The Jews were the race that God picked to do his bidding, but that was it. No where in the bible does it state that the Jews were the children of God. [quote]Ye are the children of the LORD your God: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead.Deuteronomy 14:1
Of course that says not what it seems, since it should read YHVH your God.
Anyway, I apologize for that one, I thought you had said something to that effect, but I see I was wrong. I'm sorry--scratch that since there's actually something we agree on!


Well, then, you don't mean it's telling you to prove the events of the OT? That was the initial reference to the verse, remember?
YOU BELIEVE SOME THINGS, BUT MUST PROVE OTHER THINGS LESS IMPORTANT.

I don't believe the integrity of the scriptures has been comprimised. Provable facts only leads to the reliability and the trust worthiness of this book. Non Christians who then see these facts, have a more sure foundation to build on.


WE DON'T HAVE TO DESTROY A LAW NOT TO BE SUBJECT TO IT OURSELVES.

Some of the Old Testament laws state that a person must not murder steal or commit adultery. Are you saying we are not subject to these laws? Which laws are you talking about?


WELL THEN, YOU DON'T MEAN IT'S TELLING YOU TO PROVE THE EVENTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT ?

Anything, that will aid in getting people into Gods Kingdom should be attempted. For years many people thought the bible stories were foolish. Because of this, many turned away from the bible thinking it could not be true.
Well because of recent discoveries, God is allowing the world to see first hand that the bible is true. I believe the greatest proof will follow when researchers discover the remains of Noah's Ark. I believe that day is not far off.

WHO DID GOD PROMISE (THE LAND OF ISRAEL TO?) THE JEWS OR THE ISRAELITES?

The bible makes no distinction between the Jews or Israelites. Both names are found in the Old Testament. The word Jew firsted appeared in 2 Kings 16:6.
Today's Jews are descended from the Israelites of Judah.

IF YOU CAN SEE THE SYMBOLISM, THEN YOU CAN SEE IT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE BIBLE.

The bible is filled with symbolism, my arguement was centered on the Old Testament being a book of untrue parables. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. Principal copyright 1973.

PARABLE- Short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle.


IT WAS PROPHISIED THAT THE JEWS WOULD REJECT CHRIST WHEN HE CAME THE FIRST TIME.

Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.


THE PARAGRAPH ABOVE DOES NOT MAKE SENSE WITH WHAT IS SAID ALL THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE, OT AND NT.

Christ mission has never changed, but he did not forget about the Jewish people. The bible has a definite end game. The people of Israel and their land will play a pivotal roll. Remember the story about the shepherd going back to rescue the lost sheep.

Romans 11:25,26,27

25. For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits: that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27. For this (is) my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

THE FUTURE OF ISRAEL IS STARTING NOW.

Ezekiel 37:21,22

21. And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen. whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
22. And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

Ezekiel 38:8 Tells us this will all happen in the latter years.

[queenannie]

I don't believe the integrity of the scriptures has been comprimised. Provable facts only leads to the reliability and the trust worthiness of this book. Non Christians who then see these facts, have a more sure foundation to build on.Check this out: http://www.innvista.com/culture/religion/bible/contra.htm Actually, I just realized that you said the 'integrity' of the scriptures. No, I don't believe it has, either. Still, check out that link, it's interesting.


Some of the Old Testament laws state that a person must not murder steal or commit adultery. Are you saying we are not subject to these laws? Which laws are you talking about?
I'm talking about the laws of the OT! The difference between the Levitical priesthood vs the order of Melchizedek.
The fundamental change which makes the Old testament 'old' and the new testament 'new'.

Romans 7:6 *But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
Galatians 2:16 *Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 5:14 *For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Galatians 5:18 *But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Ephesians 2:15 *Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;





Anything, that will aid in getting people into Gods Kingdom should be attempted. Even if it's not based on a foundation of faith, and may not be lasting? What good is that?
Romans 14:23 *And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
2 Corinthians 5:7 *(For we walk by faith, not by sight:)
Hebrews 11:1 *Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Faith is defined as 'unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence' and 'complete trust, confidence, or reliance'

This is a crucial point of salvation--believing in things unseen!!!!

You can't get anyone into heaven by proof! You can't get anyone else, there, besides yourself, anyway. The thing is, unless you help someone toward faith (which doesn't require proof, so using proof in your persuasion disqualifies), you're not doing them, you, or G-d any favors!

The bible is filled with symbolism, my arguement was centered on the Old Testament being a book of untrue parables. Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. Principal copyright 1973.

PARABLE- Short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle. And I told you that never had I seen that, and the link I posted did include the word fictitious in the definition, but did not say that was absolutely true every time. Allegory and parable does not mean the same as fiction! Fiction or fact is a descriptor of the noun, and Allegory and parable are descriptors of the use! Not once did I say the OT was fiction. I said it is best applied when used as an allegorical lesson!!!!


Christ mission has never changed, but he did not forget about the Jewish people. The bible has a definite end game. The people of Israel and their land will play a pivotal roll. Remember the story about the shepherd going back to rescue the lost sheep.. Yes, Christ's mission was to shepherd the lost sheep back home, these were the isrealites! He came to remind the 144,000. But this is not the jews, since they could never go 'back' to heaven, since He said they'd never been there in the first place!
The jews could only go if they accepted him as the son of G-d, but the 144,000 had their spots reserved since the beginning! Gentiles were also extended the offer of a new home in the New Jerusalem, and that is called the dispensation of grace. The true 'Isreal' is not about a piece of land or a world recognized 'nation'. This is a big hoax based on the story of Exodus. There was a interruption of history during the times of captivity of the isrealites, in which they were scattered and also they finally intermingled genetically with other races, and the people that emerged saying they were isrealites were not necessarily the true 'flock'. Why do the jews speak yiddish, when the hebrew isrealites spoke hebrew? Genetic testing has been done lately which is showing the proof of there being a difference.

Romans 11:25,26,27

25. For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits: that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27. For this (is) my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. Right, this means that the jews are not the true descendants of Jacob, otherwise Jesus wouldn't have said what he did about them not coming from heaven, therefore they could not return.

Revelation 7:4 *And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.


THE FUTURE OF ISRAEL IS STARTING NOW.

Ezekiel 37:21,22

21. And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen. whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land:
22. And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all:

Ezekiel 38:8 Tells us this will all happen in the latter years.

This is not about current political events or the hoax of the 'Isreal Nation' being perpretated so successfully by the Jews!! What does it say in Revelation?

Revelation 2:9 *I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 3:9 *Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Revelation 21:27 *And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Do you see the contradiction when Jews and Isrealites are assumed to mean the same people? It is impossible!

It never says the jews are the nation of isreal. Who says that? The Jews.

[queenannie]

however if in fact one could statistically "prove" the bible was mostly lies...which they can't i'd be all ears.You can't prove something is not true (or is a lie), you can only prove it is true. The only way to 'prove' an untruth is to prove the opposite is true. I don't see how that could be done in this case.

and whats wrong with sayin you can't prove symbolic stories to be truth? The 'proof' of the truth found within the symbolic stories of the bible is, for now, faith.

[campbell34]

Check this out: http://www.innvista.com/culture/religion/bible/contra.htm Actually, I just realized that you said the 'integrity' of the scriptures. No, I don't believe it has, either. Still, check out that link, it's interesting.


I'm talking about the laws of the OT! The difference between the Levitical priesthood vs the order of Melchizedek.
The fundamental change which makes the Old testament 'old' and the new testament 'new'.

Romans 7:6 *But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
Galatians 2:16 *Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 5:14 *For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Galatians 5:18 *But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Ephesians 2:15 *Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;




Even if it's not based on a foundation of faith, and may not be lasting? What good is that?
Romans 14:23 *And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
2 Corinthians 5:7 *(For we walk by faith, not by sight:)
Hebrews 11:1 *Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Faith is defined as 'unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence' and 'complete trust, confidence, or reliance'

This is a crucial point of salvation--believing in things unseen!!!!

You can't get anyone into heaven by proof! You can't get anyone else, there, besides yourself, anyway. The thing is, unless you help someone toward faith (which doesn't require proof, so using proof in your persuasion disqualifies), you're not doing them, you, or G-d any favors!

And I told you that never had I seen that, and the link I posted did include the word fictitious in the definition, but did not say that was absolutely true every time. Allegory and parable does not mean the same as fiction! Fiction or fact is a descriptor of the noun, and Allegory and parable are descriptors of the use! Not once did I say the OT was fiction. I said it is best applied when used as an allegorical lesson!!!!


Yes, Christ's mission was to shepherd the lost sheep back home, these were the isrealites! He came to remind the 144,000. But this is not the jews, since they could never go 'back' to heaven, since He said they'd never been there in the first place!
The jews could only go if they accepted him as the son of G-d, but the 144,000 had their spots reserved since the beginning! Gentiles were also extended the offer of a new home in the New Jerusalem, and that is called the dispensation of grace. The true 'Isreal' is not about a piece of land or a world recognized 'nation'. This is a big hoax based on the story of Exodus. There was a interruption of history during the times of captivity of the isrealites, in which they were scattered and also they finally intermingled genetically with other races, and the people that emerged saying they were isrealites were not necessarily the true 'flock'. Why do the jews speak yiddish, when the hebrew isrealites spoke hebrew? Genetic testing has been done lately which is showing the proof of there being a difference.

Right, this means that the jews are not the true descendants of Jacob, otherwise Jesus wouldn't have said what he did about them not coming from heaven, therefore they could not return.

Revelation 7:4 *And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.




This is not about current political events or the hoax of the 'Isreal Nation' being perpretated so successfully by the Jews!! What does it say in Revelation?

Revelation 2:9 *I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 3:9 *Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Revelation 21:27 *And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Do you see the contradiction when Jews and Isrealites are assumed to mean the same people? It is impossible!

It never says the jews are the nation of isreal. Who says that? The Jews.
THE FREEDOM IN CHRIST DOES NOT GIVE US A BLANK CHECK TO SIN.

Pauls Warning- 1 Corinthians 6:9,10

9. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10. Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

CHRIST DID NOT FORGET ABOUT THE JEWISH PEOPLE.

Reading your post I have no idea what you are talking about. Your wording was both counter diction, and wrong. You stated Christ came to remind the 144,000. First, remind them of what? Second, this event never happened, because it is a future event which takes place after God moves the earth's islands and mountains out of their place. Thirdly you state that Israel's existence today is a big hoax based on the story of Exodus, and then you say there was an interruption of history during the times of captivity of the Israelites, in which they were scattered and they finally intermingled genetically with other races.

At this point, please don't tell me you believe the bible, everything you have stated here has nothing to do with the bible. No where in scripture does it say that Christ came to remind the 144,000. No place in scripture does it say there was an interruption of history. No where in scripture does it state that the jews finally intermingled genetically with other races. You stated Israel's existance today is a hoax, even though the bible clearly teaches that the land of Israel would be established in the latter years.

THE CHRISTIANS OF THE PAST KNEW THE PROPHECIES.

In 1864 a book written by Dr. John Cumming stated. "How comes it to pass that as a nation they have been dispersed over every land, yet insulated, separated, and alone amid the nations? The predictions of their restoration are in words as definite only not yet fulfilled. As a nation they were cut off and dispersed, and it is as a nation that they shall be gathered and restored.

In 1866 an English Bible scholar by the name of James Grant wrote. "The personal coming of Christ, to establish His millennial reign on earth, will not take place until the Jews are restored to thier own land, and the enemies of Christ and the Jews have gathered togethered their armies from all parts of the world, and have commenced the siege of Jerusalem...now the return of the Jews to the Holy Land, and the mustering and marshaling of these mighty armies, with a view to capturing Jerusalem, must require a considerable time yet."

In 1669 a minister by the name of Increase Mather wrote a book titled The Mystery of Israel"s Salvation. He, too, showed that the jews would return to Palestine and become a nation before their spiritual conversion and the return of the Messiah, Jesus Christ.

How could these men speak with such accuracy, because they were not lost in symbolism, but they believed the bible as the literal WORD OF GOD.

[queenannie]

THE FREEDOM IN CHRIST DOES NOT GIVE US A BLANK CHECK TO SIN.
What point are you debating? Did I ever say, even once, that I had deducted from the verses I quoted, that I interpretated them as meaning that the spirit gave us the right to sin with impunity? Is that what you see them as saying? If so, please explain to me how that happened. I’ll do the same.
Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
Concluding with 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
I won’t post the whole passage, I know you have your bible handy, too. Anyway, this passage says that the ten commandments, which is the letter of the law, the ‘written law’, is a law which has jurisdiction within the physical aspect of man, which is the flesh. The flesh is destined to die, regardless of what our mind decides to do (live or die in the second death), and so any laws that circumscribe matters of the flesh are both inherently based from the marker of sin and death. They don’t rely on our conscience or ability to do right, they are specific instructions on how not to do wrong.
Kind of like the first rules of our school days, from kindergarten or first grade: don’t talk without raising your hand, don’t get out of your seat unless you ask, don’t go to the bathroom without telling the teacher, don’t push and shove at recess.
The main idea here, is that even if we don’t do the things we’re not supposed to, which in the OT, could be punishable by death, what were the results? We just got to live a little longer, because we’re going to die anyway. Dead end.
Then Christ came, and told us of a new law, that, if we complied with the requirements, would put us above the dead end of the ‘law of the letter’ and above death, itself. All we had to do was change our center of consciousness from the physical dead end self to the eternal realm of the divine spark which we call the ‘mind’, because that’s the only part of us which has the ability needed to fulfill our obligations under the new law. The new law is much simpler, two basic things, one basic action. This action is something we can do without moving a muscle, and therefore we can actively uphold the law every minute we exist. These two laws do not, in any way, interfere with the law of the letter, because if the positive action of this law is adhered to, then the things we were told not to do can not co-exist in the presence of the second law’s principle. They rely on our new ability to do right which originates from love, and gives rise to our conscienceIt’s a promotion, based on our new higher understandings which come only through the spirit of Christ, and the principle is love. An active behavior which is not manifested originally in the physical sense. It begins in the parts of the mind which are not composed of matter, like our arms, legs, etc. are. It is ethereal spiritual essence, from the divine source of the same. When we rise above the realm of death on earth, we rise also above it’s laws governing the earthly principles, we are not subject to the jurisdiction of death unless we forget the law of love.

Love=light=life
and
law=sin=death
very simple to understand

In the natural order of things, all things ‘above’ surpass the things ‘below’.
Back to school: when we get older and pass through a few grade levels, the tone of the ‘rules’ starts to change. Now we are told, ‘Take your tray to the window after you eat. Bring your homework to class tomorrow. Be courteous to your neighbors and don’t talk and disturb them while they’re studying. Treat the others the way you want to be treated.’ The Golden Rule…
On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Matthew 22:40

In no way do I believe I can sin at will. I now have the ability (by the spirit) to be trusted to my own judgment, because if I truly have the spirit, love will determine my every action, and I don’t need a long list of ‘donts’, rather I am promoted to a shorter list of ‘dos’. The natural advancement of development applies to all aspects of our being, physical as well as spiritual. To believe we’re still under the law of the letter is preventing ourselves from obtaining life, and remaining in death. Which means we deny the spirit. That is the only true sin. Denying the spirit, denying love, which is also the same as ‘selfishness’ and ‘ego-centric’.


Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? ...nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. That’s a given, when you’re governed by the spirit. These physical ‘sins’ are not more powerful than the spirit of truth and so we say ‘death, where is your sting?’ Of course, we must keep constant diligence upon our focus, and not let it stray back to the physical kingdom of death.

[queenannie]

You stated Christ came to remind the 144,000. First, remind them of what? The origin of their spirit…the seed from which they came. Second, this event never happened, because it is a future event which takes place after God moves the earth's islands and mountains out of their place. What, that Jesus didn’t come to awaken sleeping minds? Or the 144,000 being sealed? You can’t be sure of the chronology of the events in Revelation, everyone assumes they’re in the proper order in a 7 year period. But upon closer examination, there are a multitude of possibilities, and it’s not limited to having to be just one of them. Besides, that is totally irrelevant. The 144,000 are the ones whose names have been written in the book of life, where Jesus recorded their names. That is not the same as the great multitude in the white robes, who came out of the tribulation, which we call ‘born again’. These are the ‘gentiles’ in the NT, whom Paul is missionary to. The 144,000 are the ‘other sheep’ that Jesus mentions which are scattered about the world, and are specifically identified in the list of the 12 descendants, in Chapter 7, ‘of all the tribes of Israel’. Have you ever really read that and noticed it is not the same of the 12 tribes as led by Jacob’s son’s? Crucial detail.

At this point, please don't tell me you believe the bible, everything you have stated here has nothing to do with the bible. No where in scripture does it say that Christ came to remind the 144,000. No place in scripture does it say there was an interruption of history. No where in scripture does it state that the jews finally intermingled genetically with other races. So, in order to believe the bible, I am not allowed to believe a single tidbit of anything other than what it literally states? Although you seek proof outside it for it’s own existence? But no chance of considering such as hebrew and jewish history, which, BTW, is not completely contained in the bible in its entirety? Have you not heard of the lost tribes? The assyrian captivity? Orthodox and European jews?

You stated Israel's existance today is a hoax, even though the bible clearly teaches that the land of Israel would be established in the latter years. Show me where it 'clearly' teaches that. Show me where it says the children of isreal are the same as the jews, specifically in reference to the 'holy land'.

THE CHRISTIANS OF THE PAST KNEW THE PROPHECIES.How can they ‘know’ things that haven’t come to pass, yet, except to believe, unless they are prophets, as well?

In 1864 a book written by Dr. John Cumming ...they were cut off and dispersed, and it is as a nation that they shall be gathered and restored. You just made a statement against there being an interruption of history and an intermingling. What the heck does cut off and dispersed mean? A prophesy cannot be properly understood if the subjects of the prophesy are mis-identified. You must establish the foundation of such prophesy first thing.

"The personal coming of Christ, to establish His millennial reign on earth, will not take place until the Jews are restored to thier own land, and the enemies of Christ and the Jews ...a view to capturing Jerusalem, must require a considerable time yet." Christ and the jews were enemies with each other! They had him put to death!-- in the most humilitating form of exectution that existed at that time. They continue to deny Jesus is the Son of G-d, and so if we believe Jesus, they are not on his side or his Father’s! He who hates me hates my father… He who rejects me will not be entered into the Kingdom of my Father...
Why would G-d and his people have to besiege their own city? It comes down from the heavens, it’s not the Jerusalem that we already have! Satan and his army attack the city of G-d, but are destroyed before they hardly begin. The idea of the ‘holy land’ is part of the hoax. Show me where that is truly promised. The promise made about the land of canaan in the OT is not about the New Jersusalem spoken of in the NT. All that ‘interpretation’ of prophesy is based on misunderstandings and misrepresentations, and do not truly originate in the bible. Try to find some substantial proof connecting these OT and NT ideas with certainty, solely within the bible. They are two different masters, and you can’t serve both.

The only prophesies which apply to christians (defined as followers of christ) are in the NT. These are made by Jesus himself, and John, under direction of Jesus.

That’s the whole basis for this debate: you’re trying to prove a reason to believe in Christ using the old testament!


In 1669 a minister by the name of Increase Mather ... before their spiritual conversion and the return of the Messiah, Jesus Christ.They denied him the first time, and haven't changed their mind yet. Do you think they will?How could these men speak with such accuracy, because they were not lost in symbolism, but they believed the bible as the literal WORD OF GOD.That's exactly why they do not understand! It’s not all been proven yet, not even half! The proven half is in the bible, and these ‘understanding’ were born a long time later! Nothing been’s proven, you just assume it’s so because these men speak with authority. What about the authority of the bible, and Jesus?

[campbell34]

The origin of their spirit…the seed from which they came. What, that Jesus didn’t come to awaken sleeping minds? Or the 144,000 being sealed? You can’t be sure of the chronology of the events in Revelation, everyone assumes they’re in the proper order in a 7 year period. But upon closer examination, there are a multitude of possibilities, and it’s not limited to having to be just one of them. Besides, that is totally irrelevant. The 144,000 are the ones whose names have been written in the book of life, where Jesus recorded their names. That is not the same as the great multitude in the white robes, who came out of the tribulation, which we call ‘born again’. These are the ‘gentiles’ in the NT, whom Paul is missionary to. The 144,000 are the ‘other sheep’ that Jesus mentions which are scattered about the world, and are specifically identified in the list of the 12 descendants, in Chapter 7, ‘of all the tribes of Israel’. Have you ever really read that and noticed it is not the same of the 12 tribes as led by Jacob’s son’s? Crucial detail.

So, in order to believe the bible, I am not allowed to believe a single tidbit of anything other than what it literally states? Although you seek proof outside it for it’s own existence? But no chance of considering such as hebrew and jewish history, which, BTW, is not completely contained in the bible in its entirety? Have you not heard of the lost tribes? The assyrian captivity? Orthodox and European jews?

Show me where it 'clearly' teaches that. Show me where it says the children of isreal are the same as the jews, specifically in reference to the 'holy land'.

How can they ‘know’ things that haven’t come to pass, yet, except to believe, unless they are prophets, as well?

You just made a statement against there being an interruption of history and an intermingling. What the heck does cut off and dispersed mean? A prophesy cannot be properly understood if the subjects of the prophesy are mis-identified. You must establish the foundation of such prophesy first thing.

Christ and the jews were enemies with each other! They had him put to death!-- in the most humilitating form of exectution that existed at that time. They continue to deny Jesus is the Son of G-d, and so if we believe Jesus, they are not on his side or his Father’s! He who hates me hates my father… He who rejects me will not be entered into the Kingdom of my Father...
Why would G-d and his people have to besiege their own city? It comes down from the heavens, it’s not the Jerusalem that we already have! Satan and his army attack the city of G-d, but are destroyed before they hardly begin. The idea of the ‘holy land’ is part of the hoax. Show me where that is truly promised. The promise made about the land of canaan in the OT is not about the New Jersusalem spoken of in the NT. All that ‘interpretation’ of prophesy is based on misunderstandings and misrepresentations, and do not truly originate in the bible. Try to find some substantial proof connecting these OT and NT ideas with certainty, solely within the bible. They are two different masters, and you can’t serve both.

The only prophesies which apply to christians (defined as followers of christ) are in the NT. These are made by Jesus himself, and John, under direction of Jesus.

That’s the whole basis for this debate: you’re trying to prove a reason to believe in Christ using the old testament!

They denied him the first time, and haven't changed their mind yet. Do you think they will?That's exactly why they do not understand! It’s not all been proven yet, not even half! The proven half is in the bible, and these ‘understanding’ were born a long time later! Nothing been’s proven, you just assume it’s so because these men speak with authority. What about the authority of the bible, and Jesus?
Unless we had read the Old Testament we never would of understood who Jesus was. The Old Testament told us who to look for. The future prophecies
which speak of America, Israel, Russia, and other nations are also to be found there, and were placed there long before Jesus entered this world. Both the Old and New Testament speaks of Gods chosen people escapeing Babylon. It is mentioned in Revelation 18:4 and it speaks of this in Jeremiah 51:45. The end time events are also found in Matthew 24:29 sun will darkened and the moon will not give her light, This description will also be found in Joel 2:10,11.
The bible speaks about the abomination of desolation which will take place when the anti christ takes over the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. This temple will be built with the hands of men. This is not Gods temple, that one will come later. In Matthew 24:15 it tells you that this event is spoken about by Daniel the prophet.
The New Testement is telling you to check out the Old Testement. You can read about the anti christ in Daniel 8:9. To understand these prophecies you need both books. They were both authored by God. Wish I had more time to adress this.

[Genesis]

you can prove things are not true. if the possibility to prove something true exists then the opposite exists.



and what i mean by saying symbolism isn't truth is that symbolism hold truth in a different form. symbolic stories are not meant to be taken literal. they have a message within them. and i honestly don't see the problem in not taking the fact that eve was formed from a rib true or a talking snake brought about the end of their stay in eden. i thought the truth was in the message. not the manner by which we receive it.its many forms if you will.


or just in it's literal form,symbolism signifies or stands for something else. Usually that something is concrete. It is not common for a thought or feeling to develop into a symbol as symbols are universal and represent cultures, traditions and religions of family of origin. Examples of symbols include a crucifix or a menorah, a stop sign or a door knocker. Symbols direct and organize, record and communicate large amounts of information in a quick way. Cultures rely on them to maintain order, discipline and moral ethics.


symbolism is an external account of something. what is internal is truth and hidden by a brief facade.

or at least thats how i see it.

[campbell34]

you can prove things are not true. if the possibility to prove something true exists then the opposite exists.



and what i mean by saying symbolism isn't truth is that symbolism hold truth in a different form. symbolic stories are not meant to be taken literal. they have a message within them. and i honestly don't see the problem in not taking the fact that eve was formed from a rib true or a talking snake brought about the end of their stay in eden. i thought the truth was in the message. not the manner by which we receive it.its many forms if you will.


or just in it's literal form,symbolism signifies or stands for something else. Usually that something is concrete. It is not common for a thought or feeling to develop into a symbol as symbols are universal and represent cultures, traditions and religions of family of origin. Examples of symbols include a crucifix or a menorah, a stop sign or a door knocker. Symbols direct and organize, record and communicate large amounts of information in a quick way. Cultures rely on them to maintain order, discipline and moral ethics.


symbolism is an external account of something. what is internal is truth and hidden by a brief facade.

or at least thats how i see it.
I never try and prove something in the Bible is not true, the information I find only verifies what the Bible clearly states. You cannot start messing with the words in the book of revelation. The bible gives a warning to any who would.
Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. You are so lost in you symbolism that i doubt you can read a sentence with out going off on a tangent. You spend way to much time worrying about symbolism. The bible was written so simple people can understand it.

[freakwentflyer]

Quote-The bible was written so simple people can understand it.__________________

You sure left yourself open with that one! I'll resist the temptation.

[Genesis]

I never try and prove something in the Bible is not true, the information I find only verifies what the Bible clearly states. You cannot start messing with the words in the book of revelation. The bible gives a warning to any who would.
Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. You are so lost in you symbolism that i doubt you can read a sentence with out going off on a tangent. You spend way to much time worrying about symbolism. The bible was written so simple people can understand it.
i really don't think any christians would try and disprove their own faith. i wouldn't anyway.

however i do think that we should be objective in the matter. if people come to us with questions that try and prove our faith idiotic, all we can hope to do is answer them. i find the oppositions attampts to disprove our faith merely strengthens it in the long run.


let the come:p raaarrr

[JesusDiedForU]

i find the oppositions attampts to disprove our faith merely strengthens it in the long run.


-Likewise....

The same can be said for Christians

[queenannie]

I never try and prove something in the Bible is not true, the information I find only verifies what the Bible clearly states. You've not even 'proven' that you understand what the bible clearly states. I visited your website and I realize this by some of the things I read there. I can't say the things 'you said' because I'm not clear on whether these are your words or if they are borrowed from another. If they are not yours, then is that really testimony? An effective witness tells things from their perspective, because they have 'seen', with eyes that see.

The main thing that caught my eye was 'accept the bible or reject truth'. Is this about following Jesus or following the words of the bible? Even if you do the latter, in the gospel of John, it clearly states the identity of the Word of G-d.

It does not say 'The word was the bible'.
What does it say?

It doesn't matter what we reject or accept as long as we accept Jesus.
Not the bible.

When a person is baptized, do they confess that the bible is the word of G-d?
No.

Does Jesus say 'The bible is the way, the truth, and the life?'
No.

Accepting Jesus is the only Way, not accepting that the bible is true. No matter how you try to prove it or argue that point, it doesn't change the fact that believing in the bible will not get you into eternity. If you truly trust Him then you know the bible is true. Whether 'provable' by the standards of man, or not. How can you hold the bible to those standards? That is the opposite of exalting the word of G-d.

The bible was written so simple people can understand it.
That, sir, is the real myth. Literal belief in the bible is simple, but a deep understanding of the truth within the bible is the narrow gate and the difficult way.

Prophecy doesn't prove Jesus is the son of G-d, unless you believe. Nothing does, unless you trust that He is.

You may think I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'll tell you, I've had 27 years of seeking the truth, and all that time I did it with the faith that Jesus was what the bible said He was, because somehow I knew in my heart it was true. I've been down a long road, and I'm still traveling. But the light just keeps getting brighter. The dimmest it was, was when I was a literalist. I believe that's a necessary step for some, perhaps all of us. But unless you keep your mind open and don't stiffen your neck, you'll never need those sunglasses in your pocket. The secrets hidden within the bible are a reward for the searchers, they are not a 'gimme' for the simple. Otherwise the gate would not even be there, it would be an off-ramp with a speed limit of 65 mph.

I read the bible every day, and every day I find even more meaning in it than the one before. And, like I said, I'm far beyond the idea of it being a literal instruction.

I know you probably think I'm trying to prove that the bible isn't true, or maybe you don't. Either way, I know you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying: the bible is 100% true, and profitable for instruction, guaranteed, I bet my life on it, I recommend it for anyone who cares to join me. But the proof of that truth does not depend on things we can touch, or see, or use any of our physical senses to perceive. It's only proven within each of us, in our hearts, and it's something you always think you have, until the day you really have it. Then you're not afraid to say, I know. I know because I trust in the Word (Jesus, that is.) Then all things will be revealed which are hidden. That's what pentecost truly means. The second baptism with the holy spirit. It doesn't just automatically happen when someone says they're a christian or that they believe. It doesn't matter what your mouth says, because G-d knows what's in the heart of every soul. A water baptism is just when you knock upon that door. When the door is opened, then you've reached the second baptism. The first is something you chose to do, to give yourself in His name. The second is bestowed on you when you are ready to receive it.

I know these things. Only you can prove them, but just to yourself, and not in the way you think.

[Genesis]

-Likewise....

The same can be said for Christians

i would completely agree with you on that.


i think its just a given in reality that when one force exists there is an equal and opposite force. just like every action has an equal and opposite reaction.



i strongly believe in that.i don't think one factor can exist without the other.



hmm..i don't know ... maybe we all secretly revel in the oppertunity to defend our faith or lack there of. who knows. all i know is when mine is questioned, it is strengthened beyond belief and i hope that counts for all those who believe.

[queenannie]

you can prove things are not true. if the possibility to prove something true exists then the opposite exists.If you are still at the stage where only the possibility for proof exists, and not yet the actual proof, then there is no way you can then prove the opposite exists--yet. You can't prove the opposite of a possibility! There's got to be a control or some kind of benchmark, whatever, that is clearly defined and confirmed before you can prove something in relation to it.

You can't prove the bible isn't true until you prove it is true. Since the object of it's lesson is not material (like how to learn how to shear sheep) but spiritual (as in: 101 sure fire ways to spend your eternal vacation with G-d!) there is no way to prove it on a material level--which is all we basically regard as 'proof', things which we can perceive of. The proof of things unseen is proof that is unseen, aka 'faith.'

You either believe in Jesus or you don't. You can't prove to someone else He is for real by proving there once was a big ship built and now it's rotting on a mountaintop in Turkey.

As well, this is not about 'defending' one's faith, as you were saying.

You shouldn't have to defend your faith. It's yours, you believe in it, and who cares if someone else thinks you're putting your eggs in a broken basket? If your faith is true, you won't care if they think your basket's broken, because you know it isn't. If they don't want a basket like yours, does that mean you're going to give up yours, which you already trust and believe will hold your eggs safely? That would be an unwise thing to do, right?

If someone thinks your faith is idiotic, oh well. I'm not saying be ugly or a bad example of someone who believes in Jesus, just don't let it alter your course. By demonstrating what you believe from the stance of defending it, how many people do you think will decide they'd get something out of it, too. Defending something wears a person out. That's not an ideal factor when looking for peace of mind.

That's why I really dislike encountering the word 'apologetic' when it comes to someone's beliefs, call it religion or whatever. Why should anyone have to apologize for what they believe in to someone who believes differently? That is ludicrous. It does more damage than what the person 'apologizing' thinks they're correcting.

Faith is for affirmation, not for defending.

[Genesis]

if you prove something true and then disprove it it was never true



until god can be proven the possibilities for him being truth and fallacy are both at equal standings. the only thing that seperates us is faith.



until god is proven to exist, the possibilities have not yet been fulfilled but could go either way.



to describe loyalty to ones faith as a lack of true faith is indignant and neither you nor i have a say on what true faith is. i seek to defend god as i would seek to defend my own mother or father. with the same comapssion and love as i could express for their name i would express it for gods name.


and i find it strange that you equate defending faith with being as mob hysteric as abandoning it because someone else does it. loyalty tomy faith evokes my defence. to abandon my faith would serve to show my lack of "true"faith. you defend your opinions on this site when people misunderstand you or if people attack you. does this then then not mean that if your opinion were true you would not defend it to the very people who misunderstand you?


what should be is a dream. a fleeting one at that as each moment passes. i accept gracefully people who insult god and forgive them. i forgive them and embrace them. i accept their right to do that.

if your loyalty lies in silence then that is your peace of mind.

if my loyalty lies in my willingness to defend then that is my peace of mind.


peace of mind comes from an affirmation from within. this affirmation comes from many internal and external factors which both may bear a spiritual influence also.


defending my faith does not wear me out but makes me at peace with myself.


if that is my way then there is no other way for me to go. there is no should about it nor wrong in what i am doing as a loyalty.







i agree no-one shoudl have to apologise for their faith. and no-one shoudl expect someone to apologise for it.

[queenannie]

if you prove something true and then disprove it it was never true That's what I mean, you can't prove something is a lie, only that it is truth.



until god can be proven the possibilities for him being truth and fallacy are both at equal standings. the only thing that seperates us is faith. They are not at equal standings for everyone. This whole area is only qualified as subjective, not objective.



until god is proven to exist, the possibilities have not yet been fulfilled but could go either way.This will never happen in the sense that you seem to be saying. If a person has no faith that G-d exists, then they probably won't be in a state of consciousness long enough after finding out He does to discuss the discovery with any other souls. So it boils down to, it doesn't matter, either you believe and there is no need of proof, or you don't and there is still no need in proof because it will be of no value to you.



to describe loyalty to ones faith as a lack of true faith is indignant and neither you nor i have a say on what true faith is. i seek to defend god as i would seek to defend my own mother or father. with the same comapssion and love as i could express for their name i would express it for gods name. The kind of loyalty that brings one to defend something is not the same as faith in the perfection of G-d. Faith surpasses loyalty.

You may not feel you have a say in what true faith is, but don't speak for me, because I know what it is. The only reason I say this is because I haven't always, and when you cross a threshold, you know the differences that exist on both sides of that doorway.


and i find it strange that you equate defending faith with being as mob hysteric as abandoning it because someone else does it. loyalty tomy faith evokes my defence. to abandon my faith would serve to show my lack of "true"faith. you defend your opinions on this site when people misunderstand you or if people attack you. does this then then not mean that if your opinion were true you would not defend it to the very people who misunderstand you?
Although it may seem otherwise, I don't usually debate my opinions. If I feel a need to state an opinion, I say that it is such, and if someone doesn't agree, that's okay. An opinion is not something that needs to be argued, as it is an individual possession. Opinion also has no role in what faith truly is. Your opinion of something about G-d is also not the same as believing or trusting. It doesn't matter about anything beyond what you base your trust on, such as the unconditional love, or mercy, or compassion, whatever, that you receive from the object your place your trust in. You know why you have faith, and the rest is details.


what should be is a dream. a fleeting one at that as each moment passes. i accept gracefully people who insult god and forgive them. i forgive them and embrace them. i accept their right to do that. Why do you need to forgive someone for insulting G-d? Are they insulting you? Do you think it offends G-d? That's a personal issue.


peace of mind comes from an affirmation from within. this affirmation comes from many internal and external factors which both may bear a spiritual influence also. I see it as coming from one source, easily defined with one word.



if that is my way then there is no other way for me to go. there is no should about it nor wrong in what i am doing as a loyalty. of course it can't be wrong, but will it serve the purpose you need it to?







i agree no-one shoudl have to apologise for their faith. and no-one shoudl expect someone to apologise for it.[/QUOTE]

[Genesis]

i do not think you above anyone else,know what true faith is in accordance with others. only what you perceive it to be within yourself.

in fact i don't think anyone knows what true faith is in accordance with others.


its personal.


on that belief i din't see it as fair that you had said mine was not. i did not mean that you did not know what true faith was within you. i apologise if it seemed that way to you.that was not my intent as i know faith is a very personal thing indeed.



i have faith in the perfection of god to the best of my ability.i have only recently found my faith in god and am still learning.
but i will still defend the word of god if someone uses it for hate because that is not what god is to me.




so to your standing it shall be seen.



to me fallacy can still be proven in reality. but self can see fit not to be akin with such overviews. but that is choice again. a choice i am not akin with but graciously accept if even my words seem coarse.


when i say forgive the insult of god i mean forgive their ignorance towards those who follow him. in otherwards if they show anger and treat those of the faith like morons, and speak ill of them i would still forgive them for that because it is their belief.


i think my acts of loyalty do serve my purpose well. it may not seem it to you but i could not possibly even try and go into the depth of it in my head and try and relay it in words [im not one for them at the best of times, even when the most pellucid are all that are required] they give me peace of mind but it only serves as one factor. there are a lot of other more personal things as regards my faith in god that help me achieve this.



it would appear otherwise but it is many a time that the giving of opinion can be misconstrieud as an attempt at debate. i'm sure you have witnessed this yourself. its a fine line between both. but i think most can see the difference. and most do not attempt to enter into debate on matters such as these as most accept belief as belief.

[queenannie]

i do not think you above anyone else,know what true faith is in accordance with others. only what you perceive it to be within yourself.

in fact i don't think anyone knows what true faith is in accordance with others.


its personal.
In light of what you are saying, I think we might be using the word 'faith' differently in regard to its definition. I'm using it as a 'unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence', and it seems you are using it as meaning 'a religion or a system of religious beliefs.'

If that's the case, then you are absolutely correct, and I wouldn't ever presume to tell anyone what or how to believe.






i have faith in the perfection of god to the best of my ability.i have only recently found my faith in god and am still learning. That's all you can do, as long as you trust Him, then it's all good. The rest will be given to you when it is time.
but i will still defend the word of god if someone uses it for hate because that is not what god is to me.Not truly to anyone, really, and in this regard loyalty is excellent. But not to be confused with being the same as faith. Being loyal to and having faith in someone or something are two different things altogether.
Loyalty is defending or supporting. Faith is believing. Nothing can substitute for faith.

to me fallacy can still be proven in reality.What is reality? How do we know that what we call 'reality' is nothing but a fallacy?

when i say forgive the insult of god i mean forgive their ignorance towards those who follow him. in otherwards if they show anger and treat those of the faith like morons, and speak ill of them i would still forgive them for that because it is their belief.But, still, it is not yours to forgive, if they're not speaking about you. We can't forgive an insult that is not ours, and although we are all a part of God and He is in each of us, if you look at it that way, it can possibly cause some negative energy within you, you never know.


i think my acts of loyalty do serve my purpose well. it may not seem it to you but i could not possibly even try and go into the depth of it in my head and try and relay it in words [im not one for them at the best of times, even when the most pellucid are all that are required] they give me peace of mind but it only serves as one factor. there are a lot of other more personal things as regards my faith in god that help me achieve this.
I'm sure that is all very effective and appropriate, I don't mean to infer that it is not. But our choice of words is very important when we want to express what we think with accuracy. It can avoid many troubles down the road if you're sure the words you use project the meaning that you intend.

[Genesis]

the first understanding of faith was different.




as regards faith and loyalty i know faith isn't loyalty. my faith drives me to act within that loyalty but they are not akin in definition both literally or internally.




i don't go in much for the whole philosophicak what is reality malarky to be honest so i wouldn't ebter into it only to think that how do we know reality is nothing but truth?endless. how do we knoew that reality isn't either or?


it is mine to forgive because i am a christian and i was incorporating myself into that statement a it was meant as a whole by which i said "to those who follow him". if you insult one you insult all in my books. call a christian a bastard you're calling me one because i am a christian and all shouldn't be lumped into a derogatory category.




as regards words portraying accuracy...i agree we should try and be as accurate as possible when using words.then again, even the most accurate of words will never be interpreted with full correctness because words know no bounds. and to each his own unfortunately.even in speech words are poetic justice and all can seek "god's breath in common statement" to borrow a phrase. all interpret differently but we can always go back and highlight what we mean if it becomes an issue. that's the beauty of language. it always means something else to someone.

lmao.


unfortunately for most

[queenannie]

i don't go in much for the whole philosophicak what is reality malarky to be honest so i wouldn't ebter into it only to think that how do we know reality is nothing but truth?endless. how do we knoew that reality isn't either or? Well, I really don't, either, it's too vague and circular for me. I guess it sounded like philosophy but I meant it more as a pin-pointer. Do you know what I mean?

I do believe that reality is nothing but truth. That is an excellent way to put it, perfect. If that is the case, then the world we live in is not as real as we think, because there's not enough truth in it to justify is as being reality--comfort is often mistaken for truth, IMO

Some well-known statements of philosophy, that have been repeated until cliche, however, can sometimes have a startling ring of truth if we set aside the disguise of triteness and really hear the words. For example, "I think, therefore I am." From my point of view, everything was created by the manifestation of a perfect word which arose from a perfect thought. In the same way, each of us has a mind which is a small part of the mind that had the perfect thought. What we are is memory and thoughts, and so thinking is being.

Anyway that's off topic. :rolleyes:

[Genesis]

nah i see where you're coming from on that.


its a nice beliefe that the world is truth. in fact it would probably make a perfect world if we could act truthfully to the most complete of ways.


not so offtopic at all. religion in itself is a form of philosophy.



its nice to hear your viewpoint on the matter of truth and being.