Prove to me the bible is real...

OK, I decided to put one of these to the test... so I chose this:

Why? Because I've recently learnt about the laws of relitivity, what it all means, and what E=MC2 actully stands for... So I looked up the chapter in question:

Say wha'? What does this have to do with energy conversation?

Bah, I bet you don't even understand it yourself... you've been as guilty as I have in copying and pasting the text from a website.. at least I had the common decency to admit and even link to the source of my information.

(and Epiphany, change the track will you... you keep repeating the same thing over and over again.. I heard you the first time)

 

Been known since early egyptions times.. just because the europeans forgot it, does not mean it's magical that the bible happens to know too

Give me a break will you, anyone that looks up at the night's sky can see that there are a lot of stars.. again, no real significance..

 

Because, as we explained in another thread, your personal connection with christ is a lie/fantasy designed to make you feel better about your life, an excuse for your existance..

Of cource, if I was to experiance what you say you've experianced, I'd not want to turn back because the real world is so cold and unforgiving... and it's OK that you're scared..

 

If you'd look at the new international version you'd maybe understand all the verses. Open your mind, and let God in. And no I do my research. I make sure I can back up everything I say. I actually went to college and had courses of theology my friend. Where as if you need to copy and paste rock on. I have my Bible with me all the time. But once again I have faith and don't need proof. I just provide it for people like you.

 

"By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men."

nope, still confused... doesn't say anything about energy conversaion here either.. just something about some fire being stored to kill ungodly men...

I prefer to think of letting god in as CLOSING my mind... my mind is already way open, thank you

Go on then.. back it up... i'm waiting

WOW!!! even in the shower? aren't you worried that it'll get wet?

Oh come off it, that's dumb... you should never accept anything on pure faith alone... that's why we've now looking back and regretting the iraq war... the american people had FAITH in bush when he said sadam had WMD... and look what happened...

I'm sorry, but anyone that exists on faith alone is an idiot... If you're not prepared to examin something for yourself, and find out why, then you're nothing more than a sheep following the herd.

 

Oh hey, I've got another contradiction for you:

aka: Kill all witches
BUT!!!

In fact, the whole bible has references to killing people.... and yet this is forbidden.

 

northernlehigh97, let me ask you something.. is masturbation a sin? I know this is a bit off topic... but I need to know this to answer a very important question...

 

Let me clear myself up, I'm not the sharpest pencil in the box at all. I know my Bible, but I'm always moving forward. My next step is Bible College. I don't want you to think that I'm arrogant. I'm very humble. I'm just trying to explain to you so you too can have the joy I have living for God. Research the Law of conservation of mass and energy, then get back to me if you still truly don't understand. I'm sure you understand it, but don't want to accept it. Hmmm, yup my Bible goes everywhere. It gets wet I get a new one. It would just be like if someone needed a Bible while I was walking down the street, I'd give it to them. I enjoy introducing people to the best thing in life, God. Once again my faith isn't based on the Bible alone. I have faith and must be an idiot according to you.

Faith, and faith alone will allow you to accept truth. As long as any of us try to understand and live Christianity on human terms, on human logic, we will never have the true Spiritual Gift of Faith. We, as humans, need to allow our human selves, our "essence" our understanding, our mind, our spirit to die; and be reborn of the Holy Spirit, before we can come into the fullness of FAITH, understanding and acceptance of Jesus as Savior and God.

One of the mistakes some people have made with their use of logic seems to be a false conclusion that God is limited in his ability to be, and appear, in as many persons, and places, as he desires. God is not limited in his abilities as we are, he can be and do anything he wants. God is not finite, he is infinite. For some to use this as an argument defies all understandings of "a god", and thus God. If their understanding of God is synonymous with / part of their logic, then their logic is flawed. Thus their conclusions are flawed. They are not using FAITH.
As long as anyone insists on relying on logic and human reasoning, they will never achieve the fullness of the Spiritual Gift of FAITH.

This use of human understanding, reasoning and logic is a self defeating path, and a dangerous path, because it can lead to the non-Biblical belief that either there is more than one God, or Jesus isn't our Savior, both of which are wrong/false conclusions, which are in opposition to God's Word, the Bible. Therefore they are in opposition to God Himself.

I also suspect that it is these false beliefs, that will allow many humans, including those who are Christians, those claiming to be Christians, those who are uncommitted to Christ, those who do not believe in Christ, and those who refuse to believe in Christ, to be deceived by the anti-Christ. After all he is called the Deceiver.

With all that said, I'd love to tell you more about having faith and such. I am way to tired and need some sleep. I just hope I cleared up some things. If you'd like to continue, I will tomorrow. May God bless you and open your heart and soul.

 

Let me first say this - I will agree with anyone who says the Jewish ways of geneology, methods of tracing lineage and categorisation are very different than our modern day ways.

I dont claim to understand their customs but there are people who are Jewish Historians and geneology experts who do know how this worked.

-Unlike Muslims - Jews could and would adopt children.
-Unlike modern cultures - Jews did not seem to make any distinction between adopted children and their 'Blood' children
-Unlike Western Society - Geneology was traced through both the Mother and the Father (not just Fathers family name)
- Their Patriarchal society did not refer to the 'Mother' (Mary) but to the Grandfather Heli.

So.. When tracing Jesus' geneology through his Mother's side - They would put Heli as he was the next 'Patriarch' on that side.
. even when going back through a Mothers side - they still used Fathers names. ok

There are those who say that the lineages recorded in Matthew 1:1-16, and Luke 3:23-38, which list the progenitors leading to King David, are contradictory to each other.
There is this idea that they both lead to joseph, and that it cannot possibly be explained away as Matthew following the line from David, while Luke is following the line to David (with the father of Joseph having two different names). For Joseph could not have two different fathers.
But in fact, Joseph both could, and He did have two fathers.
Not in the way which they surmise, but most definitely in the custom, historical, and Biblical context of that time.

Now this is where I will agree with anyone who complains about how Grammar does not always translate well from Greek to English.

Thinking they were helpful - translators add English items (parenthesis) which do not exist in the original manuscripts.

And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.."

I agree this causes a lot of confusion for the typical reader.

Its difficult though because, in English language, we 'need' to have the parenthesis to make it a 'proper' sentence.
Even still... its confusing to the average English reader.
This puts it very well:

The novice should take care to note that there are no parenthesis in the original Greek text. These parenthesis were put there by the translators. Unfortunately, they were put in the wrong place. "Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, which was the son of Heli," is the statement. While, "being as was supposed the son of Joseph," is the interjection, and thus what should have been put in parenthesis as the qualifying comment of the passage. In other words, the verse should read like this:

• "And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, (being as was supposed the son of Joseph)
  
• which was the son of Eli...

This clearly says, "Jesus, which was the Son of Eli," which was the son of Matthat. See the distinction here? The phrase (being as supposed the Son of Joseph) is simply the interjection. This is what belongs in parentheses and in no way should be read as Joseph was the Son of Heli (Eli). Joseph is not the son of Heli, Heli was Mary's father, making Jesus the Son of Heli. To prove this, you need only remove the interjection and you have the 'clear' understanding of what is written.



Another thing - In their way of doing Geneologies - you can definately use the word 'Begat' to describe a Grandfather who 'Begat' a Grandson.

This is why it can be said "Heli (Eli) begat Jesus" or even "Matthat begat Jesus".

This should explain why one geneology might have '13' steps of 'begatting' while another might have 12 steps.

OK ... so far so good. But what about this peculiar divergence at David.
This is another situation that looks overly-complicated but is really quite clear once you see what the Geneologists are doing.

But I wanted to point this out - This is certainly not some 'Error' or something a Scribe or translator must have 'mistranslated'.

Its really really obvious and its not just a word, a sentence or some 'translation' issue.
Its Blatant.

By contrast, the Luke chapter three genealogy doesn't use begat, and rather than trace back to Abraham, traces the descent back to Adam, 'illustrating' how this lineage goes through the whole human family, and thus showing Christ to be the fulfillment of the promised 'Seed of the Woman.' This Luke genealogy is also of David's seed, but has a path which goes through the line of his son Nathan, and then through Mary's father Heli. By contrast the Matthew chapter one genealogy goes through David's son Solomon, and then through Jechonias

Make no mistake about it - this is definately not an awkward way to 'explain around' something which should be made simple.

The Geneologists have very specific and thought through reasons for doing it this way.
Far from being sloppy - they intend to give us very detailed reports and verification which will demonstrate why Jesus is said to be the Christ and fits the very specific prophecy made at the earlier times.

We see in these unique illustrations that there are three fathers involved. Jesus' was literally linked by flesh through Mary's father Heli to King David. Then there is Jesus' earthly adoptive father, Jacob, which God cursed his line that there would not come a King to sit on the throne. And then there was Jesus' true heavenly Father 'signifying' that this is the real royal heritage that would make Him the prophesied King to ascend to the throne of David. Heli, father of Mary, the literal seed of King David, brought the kingly flesh to this prophecy, but God brought the Kingly heritage and the power to rule.

Im glad this question was brought up by you Cabdirraq.
Until now I had known some of the basics:
- One gave Josephs , another gave Mary's lineage.
- Jews used the Patriarchs
- They had peculiar rules between 'Seeds' (biological) and Adopted Sons.

I didnt realise there was very specific information being given to demonstrate all the possible ways in which Jesus 'Lineage' had to be presented and why their culture required this type of record.

Quotes taken from, what I believe is the best essay (written for the layman) on this topic:
http://members.aol.com/twarren13/birth2.html

 

I'm actully OK with my own non-belief of god right now thank you... it makes a whole hell of a lot more sence to me... but thank you for thinking of me

Again... I understand the idea of E=MC2... it's a very complex thing to try and understand, but I was watching a documentry about Enistein (hosted by Mark Steel, great great man), and it very cleaverly explained how it all worked.... I'm sorry, but I do not see what that passage in the bible has to do with energy conversion... and the fact of the matter is that I don't think you do either... you just copied the list from a website and hoped that I would not check it out.... so, please - explain it to me.. I want to understand where you're coming from

I realise that sounded very much like an insult, and in a way it was, and I'm sorry for that... but at the same time it was not an insult... (if that makes any sense... I guess not).

As I've said before, I don't believe faith to be anything more than lies without propper evidence backing it up.

again, thank you. but you know what, I'm good...

 

That is what it all boils down to in the end. Logic verses spirituality. Of course, we, as humans, need to have things proven to us in Lamen's terms so that we may understand it. When something shows up on the radar that is beyond our comprehension, we go one of two ways. Some people desire and thirst for more knowledge (I know that I do), and some people get upset and take a stand for rebuttle. If you look in history, you can see this is the case. People were constantly in a state of arguing over things that one side could not understand. The elders argue with the youth about their knowledge, the youth argues with the elders about a new point of view. Humanity is very simple, yet quite complex at the same time. Are there things in the Bible that can be explained logically? Yes.... there are things in the Bible that science has tested. Are there things in the Bible that science cannot explain? There sure are.

What most people are forgetting is that God is not about logic. That is why spiritually and logic do not go hand and hand. God could have come down to earth as a bio physicist, yet he came down here as a carpenter. He could have been born on a golden throne, and received into the world as the king he was. Instead, he was born in a stable. He uses small and humble things as an example. We want a big, flashy display.


Adam and Eve ate from the tree of wisdom. Satan convinced them that they would possess the same nature as God if they did. Instead, they stood their shaking, ashamed and in realization of the fact they were naked. It was that same temptation that fuels us to have everything be made efficient.

There is nothing wrong with worldly knowledge. I love to read and study. When something sparks my interest, I inquire all the information I can about it. However, when I want knowledge of the Lord, I know I will not find it in humanity. It does not exsist in humanity and you cannot use that or anything of this world to find the answers. God's kingdom is not of this earth. Logic, science, mathemathics, etc, will not get you there. Everyone wants to take God and make him a part of our world. He is not a part of our creation, we are a part of his.

The word of God lists fact after fact about the earth. It is funny that the Bible stated this, yet, in later ages, people believed the earth was square.

 

You correctly noticed that some Christian denominations believe Paul stops writing inspired text from The Creator and interjects his own personal policy among his Churches.

Like most Christians - I do not agree with that idea.
There are a few select times where Paul offers his own 'opinion' but he specifically tells us when.

This is simply not one of those cases.

I dont know if I can characterise it as 'Sinning'.
Some Christian denominations honestly believe they have a good reason to put women in positions of teaching with spiritual authority.

I dont agree with their interpretation but in their minds they believe they are doing good.

Like most Christians, I believe these were inspired teachings, written by Pauls Hand, inspired by The Holy Spirit of God, Yes.

This is not a fair or logical question.

It is possible, logically speaking for someone to believe the Bible is the inspired word of God and ALSO believe that this particular instruction was a specific instance where Paul was only speaking his opinion to this particular Church.

In anycase, I do believe (and cant find reason otherwise) that this is a ruling, inspired by God for the good of the Church.

Yes, I certainly do agree with this and I do follow it.

Unfortunately, many of the Authorities in my denomination have decided that this particular ruling was only for that particular Church and for 'that particular time'.

[/b]
Who is this quote refering to?
Well.. it would not be some Christian denominations who have made a different interpretation on this ruling.

"..and they speak a lie against Allah while they know it"

So our mislead women pastors wont fit this description since they sincerely believe in what they are doing.

Do these controversial differences between Christian denominations demonstrate errors or untruths in the Bible.

Absolutely not.

Just look at some of the differing Islamic 'Denominations'.
Like Christians - most of them agree on all the fundamentals and generally agree on most teachings.
However...

There are some aspects, teachings and laws which are definately NOT able to co-exist between these - The Kharajites, Shias, Asharites, Mutazalites, Sufis, Barelvis, Wahabis, Tablighis and Salafis.

I wont pretend to know the details about all the differences - but in some cases, at least one of these groups must be misunderstanding something.

Does that show the Koran is flawed.
After all.. Some of these denominations are saying "This is from Allah" while the next group is saying "No.. that is NOT from Allah".

Christianity cannot escape that either.. some groups are saying "This passage means this" - "this passage means that".

In truth - the Scripture IS very clear and its really flawed human beings who have difficulty understanding certain things.

 

cabdirazzaq, i've walked down this road, anout Paul, many a times, and i've come to the conclusion...why would i follow a guy from God or God Himslef [note im not a christian, but jesus is stilll God in my eyes]