Tell me....do you think it is possible...

that the bible was just a book written to conrtrol the human population?
I know that the bible has predicted many events...but then, so has nostradomus. So do you think it is possible that a the person(s) who wrote the bible were just psychic? What is it about the bible that MAKES it from God? And here another question...I have been told "God would never give humans the DESIRE to live forever if he did not plan on fulfilling that for us. Animals do not have this desire but people do." Well, yes we do, I dont ever want to die, and I dont know many that do, but how do we KNOW that this is not something that exsist for all life? Mabye my dog does not comprhend death the way I do, but certainly if a coyote were chasing after her to eat her she would run away or fight back...meaning that she knows this could be her end? What do you all think?

 

I'm skeptical about the alleged fulfillment of Nostradamus' predictions. While the prophecy of Henry II's death is an eyebrow raiser, the rest are simply vague and could easily be twisted to fit several events in history. This is not the same with the Bible, wherein many of the prophecies are specific and even give time frames.

Also, note that Nostradamus had definitely failed(meaning, even the extremists accept this) in one prophecy while the Bible, as far as I know and so far never did even if infidels try to disprove its claim to prophesying accuracy. (go to google and search for the ebook "David Dare" and you'll know why.)

As for the phrase, it may be true and it may not be. It's hard, if not, impossible to learn which is which, so I suggest you just leave the issue. ^^'

 

The bible didn't predict shit.

 

i always thought that maybe the bible is all fake and used to control us.

What does make it from god? how do I know that it is gods word?

also, i love conspiracies (one of my many flaws) so i tend to jump to conclusions. but even still it sounds fishy. this is gods word. these are the rules of god. if you challenge this, or fail to comply you are doomed to hell. i dont believe it. but im not ready to rule it out entirely.

i believe in rock & roll
i believe in people.
i believe in forces the human mind can never understand
i believe life will take care of me

im young. im naive. i trust. i love. its all good

for some reason im feeling happy.......

 

I believe that the Bible includes many words of God, but I am very skeptical about certain things. We already know that the Bible has been tampered with because their are a handful of books that were rejected to be included in it and it is even a topic that Jesus may have taught about reincarnation and that the Romans would not allow that teaching into the Bible because of it's Pagan or tribalistic manner. Basically, I look at Jesus for his true nature and the way I feel he would actually be, and I accept the 10 Commandments, but many other books of the Bible really turn me off. It is also believed that Jesus spent time in India during his lost years preaching and teaching in Hindu temples and the Buddhists have an ancient scroll documenting a miraculous and mysterious man that was crucified that very much fits the traits of Jesus. I personally revere this as being very possible. Many Hindu paintings of Krishna like that of Jesus depict one hand being raised and most Hindu's and Buddhists highly venerate Jesus, many Krishna followers have said that one of their main goals has been to set the 10 Commandments straight to the "Christians" because they are all breaking them! I get caught up in these things too, but something really draws me to believe that it's very true. The esoteric teachings of Jesus are very fullfilling. He is also known as Sandana and Christ is defined as a frequency name meaning "Ascended Master". Check it out!

Ben.

 

cloudminerva i really admire that post. you take time and have an open mind. You seek for the truth in religion. Good for you.

ROCK ON

 

Actually, the Bible wasn't "tampered with" in the sense that you seem to think. There was a canon of Scripture by the second century (as evidenced by the excommunication of Marcion). The Gospels and the Pauline epistles were accepted as scripture by the early second century (probably long before). Why were the Gnostic Gospels not accounted for? Why didn't Justin Martyr, Ignatius, Irenaeus, etc. mention them? Because they hadn't been written yet! The four Gospels we most likely written by 70 AD (most critics agree with that date too). The Gnostic gospels read more like Marcion's version of Luke. Their authority is in doubt and their content doesn't carry the weight of the Gospels of the Bible. To the best of our knowledge, there is no reason to accept the Gnostic gospels as authoritative. That is one of the multiple reasons they were not included in the canon.

Rest assured, the early church was very certain of what it believed and said. And it is very much what Christians still say. Jesus Christ is God and died to take away the sins of the world.

Are you serious? The ROMANS might have a problem with Paganism?! I think you need to read the history of the times. The Romans were VERY pagan. Then Constantine converts and says "Christianity is now the official religion of Rome." Now, as a Roman citizen, you have just had your religion swiped our from under you. You are now required by law to revert to Christianity. Are you suggesting that these people would object to paganism being inserted into Christianity? If so, then I think you might have a skewed view of human nature. It is my opinion that Constantine might have done more harm to everyone by making it the official religion. It would have been best if he had simply made it NOT illegal (and punished by death) as it had been before him.

How do you get the "true nature" of Jesus? What is His true nature? If a book (not just the Bible) turns you off, does that make it untrue?

 

I just know that the Jesus in my heart is not of an angry God. I love and revere Jesus for the forgivingness of his soul and his essence of being the manifest of God. I accept Jesus as spirit. As for the analytical nature of the Bible and the dates of the gospels, that really doesn't matter to me. My point is that I understand what Jesus is to me and some of what the Bible says seem to contradict the true nature of Jesus. Jesus is manifest of God, Jesus turned the other cheek, then we cannot be doomed to an eternity of a Hell by being banished away. Hell to me is perhaps a metaphor of the realities of reincarnation. But I did hear from a very educated friend of mine that there is suppossed to be a teaching of the Bible of reincarnation that was banished and Jesus taught it. I definitely believe that some parts of the Bible have been colored by the disciples' personal touch. I just believe in Jesus.

Ben.

 

Only young people want to live forever.

Ask a 90 year-old.

 

i hope i die before i get old...

 

Im in total agreement with you on that one Geckopeli.... at least based on what my 88 year old Grandpa tells me.
He looks like he would be perfectly delighted to pass away every time he falls asleep in his easy chair lol!

 

This has to be the #1 misunderstanding that people have about 'The Bible' and when, how and who it came to.
Control the population?
The Romans were doing a fantastic job of that and definately did NOT appreciate some new book suggesting that there was no difference between bondsman and freemen!

Control The Jews?
Well... The Egyptians were very efficient job until Moses came along.
Outside of that - creating a system of social, cultural and economic laws and procedures could be called 'controlling' I guess (?)
Since every hundred years all wealth was re-distributed and its was generally speaking 'Socialist' I dont see who is supposed to benefit from all this 'Controlling'?
Moses?

I have to laugh when some other people repeat the same myth but phrase it:
"The Bible was made to control the masses"
This is supposed to make me think of the mythrepeater as being so 'Elite' and somehow 'above the masses of Plebs' I guess lol.

Why would one accurate prediction 'cancel out' the accurate predictions of another anyway?

Its probably a mis-use of the word 'Psychic' but yes the numerous authors claim they are transcribing a message from a Holy Spirit of God.
That might be said to be 'Psychic' I suppose.[/QUOTE]

The hundreds (if not thousands) of times the authors clearly explain these messages are from God.
When they constantly end the statements 'Thus Says The Lord GOD'
When they remind the readers that God told them to write these things.
(Sometimes and Angel tells them its from God)
Also.. the one guy in towards the end said he WAS God and things he was saying were words from God.

(Hope that answers your question?)

I dont agree with the way this person put that statement to you either.
I think they were possibly trying to observe that humans are 'pre-programmed' to want to worship a God and believe in an afterlife.
Since we see a 'reason' for most any 'drive' in the human being - its not illogical to conclude that there is a reason for this.

I think if you ask people if they would want to live in a state of bliss, continual improvement and ever- increasing eternal happiness then they would say Yes, definately.

 

I can't believe the bible was originally written as a means of control. Way to complex for that simple task.

No doubt it's been exploited as such by some, but that's another matter entirely.

 

"The Romans were doing a fantastic job of that and definately did NOT appreciate some new book suggesting that there was no difference between bondsman and freemen!"
Who do you think compiled your bible?

I agree the bible wasn't written to control the masses, but then you have to ask what is the 'bible'. Some of the individual books existed for thousands of years as scrolls of papyrus before ever being combined into a book. Besides that there are literally hundreds of different versions of many of the biblical books and we do not have original manuscripts for even a single book in the bible. Some of the most ancient original manuscripts come formt he dead sea scrolls and they give us wildly different accounts of some biblical stories including stories where the characters have different names and the outcomes are completely different (ie: not just translational differences.)

In addition to all this, there are again literally hundreds of books which never made it to the bible including (some assert) original writings of Jesus and Mary M.

So, in order to undertand exactly what the bible is you have to look at who compiled it, edited it, translated it all into one language, decided what to disclude and labeled it as a perfect infallible, complete and unappendable text.

This task, any biblical scholar knows, was undertaken in Rome. Rome adopted Christianity and began to build the bible not very long after they stopped feeding Christians to lions and arresting anyone who practiced the religion.

Was there incentive for Rome to build a bible that served their needs? Yes.
Were there reasons why Rome might fabricate details, ommit facts and destroy evidence to build a text which did not contridict itself? Yes.
Was Rome experiencing a great deal of trouble dealing with a citizenry which included mostly Pagan, Jewish and Christian religions? Yes.
Did that give them an incentive to create one infallible religion which would borrow from all three faiths and create an unquestionable text which would serve to pacify the masses, nail down control and make the Roman Church the one inquestionable source of wisdom on God? I think the answer is yes.

Was the bible 'written' to control.. I don't think so. Did Rome twist the texts, use interpretations which favored their goals, destroy original documents, and leave out contradictory material? History suggests it did. And then it set out on a mission to destroy any traces of historical evidence and convert it's entire citizenry to this newly invented religion. If you underestimate how hard Rome tried to erase the past then try to find an original book of the bible. They do not exist. Whole libraries were burned to the ground, whole communities of 'truth-seekers' were killed. To creat THE authority on God you must systematically destroy all other accounts and Rome did just that. That alone is enough to make me question the TRUE motives for building the bible we know today.

 

Very nicely done POPthree13. I agree with you on your approach and I believe all of those things to be very true.

Ben.

 

Wow Cloud.. you are easily ready to accept any history or assertions you read by an anonymous poster in a forum.

Did you bother checking out any of that ... or just took it for gospel at first read?

 

What makes me so 'anonymous' and what in that post do you contradict?

It seems that Cloud has done soem searchig on his own. Most of what I provided is basic logic and the rest is easily found on the web or in any biblical history book you choose to pick up at the library.

If you have contradictory viewpoints I would be happy to entertain them.

 

PS: Have you bothered to check anything in the Bible out, or did you just accept it as gospel on the first read?

 

Doesnt it bother you that Cloud instantly accepted everything you wrote as gospel?

I would hope anyone would double-triple check any assertion I make against real scholarly research and multiple sources.

Anyway.. more later.. work calls