There is no GOD!!!

Huh?

Huh?

Stoner, I again sudgest you read the book of Job.

Openmind, you really haven't made a decent argument here. I mean, sure, you have showed us your inability to type and spell. You have showed us that you think Christians are "brainwashed morons". Yet, you haven't backed anything up. Do you have these feelings because you were abused by a supposed Christian? Did you get let down by someone who called themselves a christian? What expiriences in your life have caused you to feel this way? Oh, and on The Dead Sea Scrolls, how in the world could that be biased?

Oh, and way to go Genesis, I love this line:

 

God is love,
Time is money,
Soup is good food.

 

I completley agree with you, except I dont think my depresion will ever end

 

God is love,
Love is blind,
Ray Charles was blind,
Ray Charles was God.
(god is dead?)

 

First of all, I wanted to point out that the Bible was written in a period of 1600 years (60 generations) by 40 different men, on 3 continents, in 3 different languages, with 66 books. And these 40 men came from various walks of life (kings, a fisherman, a herdsman, a military general, a rabbi, a tax collector, a doctor, a cupbearer, and so forth). You are basing your religion through this long process.
As for the scriptures:


1) Acts 9:7 Paul's encounter with Christ. The men that are with him heard a voice. Yet in Acts 22:9 states that these same men did NOT hear a voice.

2) Psalms 145:9 "The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works."
But in Jeremiah 13:14 "I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the Lord: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them."

3) Exodus 15:3 "The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name."
Romans 15:33 "Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen."
<So which one is he?>

4)Matthew 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."
Luke 3:23 "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."
<So who is Joseph's father Jacob or Heli?>

5) Matthew 28:1 "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre."


Mark 16:1 "And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him."John 20:1 "The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre."
<So who all came to Jesus' tomb? Was it just Mary M., or did she have company? and how many were there?>

There's 5, you want more?

6)John 10:30 "I and my Father are one."
John 14:28 "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."
<So is Jesus equal or lower than God? But aren't they the same person?>

7) Genisus 1:25 "And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good."
Genisus 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
<Ok so he made the animals first and then man>
Genisus 2:18 "And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him."
Genisus 2:19 "And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."
<Oh but this says he made man first and then the animals. Which was first?>

8) Proverbs 4:7 "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding."


Ecclesiastics 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow."1 Corinthians 1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and wil bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."
<So is wisdom a good thing or will we be destroyed because of our intelligence>

9) Isiah 14:21 "Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities."
Deuteronomy 24:16 "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin."
<So will God punish the offspring of a father for his sins or will every person be judged on their own?>

10) Lev. 11:21 "Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;"
Lev. 11:23 "But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you."
<I don't know about you but I have never seen or heard of any insect on this planet that has four feet.>

11) Psalms 92:12: "The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree."
Isiah 57:1 "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart."

12)Acts 1:18: "Now this man (Judas) purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out."
Matt. 27:5-7: "And he (Judas) cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. And the chief priests...bought with them the potter's field."
<So what did Judas do with the money and how did he die?>

13) Matthew 5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."
Luke 6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."
<So was his sermon on a mountain or on a plain?>

14) Matthew 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."


Luke 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." John 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
<Okay people what were Jesus Christ's last words?>

15) II Samuel 24:13: "So God came to David, and told him, and said unto him, shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue. thee?"
I Chronicles 21:11: "SO God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the Lord, Choose thee. Either three years of famine or three months to be destryed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee"
<So how many years of famine was it?>

16) II Samuel 24: "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Isreal and Judah."
I Chronicles 21: "And Satan stood up against Isreal, and provoked David to number Israel."
<Unless God and Satan are also one, this doesn't make sense!>

17) Exodus 33:11 "And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend."
Genisus 32:30 "For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
BUT
John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time."
Exodus 33:20 "And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live."
<So did these men make it up? Because no man can seem to see God or they would die.>

18) 2 King 2:11 "And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven."
John 3:13 "No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, ... the Son of Man."

19) What was the color of the robe placed on Jesus?
scarlet (Matthew 27:28) or purple (John 19:2)

20) Mark 14:72 "And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept."


Matthew 26:74 "Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew."

Luke 22:60 "And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew."

John 13:38 "Jesus answered him, Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, still thou hast denied me thrice."

<When did the cock crow? Before or After Peter denyed Christ. Or did it crow at all?>

There you go I more than satisfied your demands for 5 scriptures. But ya'll didn't answer my question- How did the population we come from today form from only two people?

 

that was cool, bre0987...

he asked fer 5 you gave him 20...

 

Bre,

Im just going to address the beginning and the end of your post [and i suspect some others want to get into the middle bits]

You gave us a 'Josh McDowell' type opener:

At least we can all start with one thing agreed upon - that pretty much eliminates speculation that one group of men set out to 'write a story'.

Yes, you better believe I am basing my religion on this although it was not a 'Process' as you have stated.
Each Book is a book in itself.

You seem to be mislead about that?

Do you think each of these people were all taking turns adding and amending ALL 66 books over all that time??

---------

At the end of your post you asked how Two people populated the planet.
Well, I dont want to snicker but ... lol.. when two people love each other sometimes they like to kiss each other and the man puts his .....

Yes, of course you know how.

Now in case you are planning to 'AHA!' with the tired old 'Incest' turnabout let me say a few things to that.
First - Adam and Eve were quite literally Twins .. no.. CLONES.
Eve was clonded from Adam - so you dont need to bother waiting until the Siblings before springing your borrowed morality on us.

So was it Incestuous?

No.

I used to say 'yes and no' but now I just say NO.
'Brother and 'Sister' did not have sex. No.

The fact is, the gene pool is so rich and diverse that these people are simple NOT Brother and Sister in the sense we know those words or the conotation they hold to us.

Want example - in Genesis itself the 'Brothers' do NOT even refer to the others as 'Sisters' but rather 'Other People'.
This is because they
a) were born as much as centuries later
b) had FAR MORE GENETIC DIVERSITY than any average couple sleeping together today!

Now as far as your 'but still' moral trappings - this is a good time to ask a question to you Bre:

Since 'incest' is a concept established years later by The God of Genesis - why do you believe it exists and why do you believe its 'Wrong' to have an incestuous relationship?

After all, that is a concept instituted by God?

 

Wow, congratulations I did use a Josh McDowell opener lets give you a cookie for knowing that one! But if you look at it careful isn't it hard to fathom the adequateness of the Bible if that many people wrote the Bible and over so many years? But that wasn't the point of my post now was it? My point was the middle part, the part you decided not to bother with. Why? Because you can't reject these contradictions! I gave you cold hard scriptures from the book you so wholly love that in themselves contradict (Just to let you know- THAT was the point of my post) and what can you say against those 20 facts- NOTHING! So congratulations you did nothing to prove your point, you were unable to falsely prove my points. Oh just to let you know if you can miraculously prove them wrong, I have over 20 other contradictions to lay on you.

 

Im happy to discuss your 'contradictions' but we still need to get past your first insinuation.

We agree with Josh McDowell yes. But.. for some reason you just want to 'point' that this is some kind of problem.
I would suggest that this variety of authors and the fact these books come to us from different cultures and backgrounds does nothing but validate its authenticity and/or reliabillity.

You just want to 'suggest' there is a problem or that this somehow makes it 'less reliable'?

It leads me to believe you are under the impression 'A' book was written over a long period of time.
This is not the case, just so ya know.

 

Okay let me spell this out for you: McDowells statement can be take in T..W..O ways. If you believe in the Bible, then it can be taken positively- wow its shows how much of a miracle the Bible is or negatively- so many authors= not a reliable text. Okay now do you see what I mean about that? Yes I know Chrisitians can take that to heart but in a way it helps us nonbelievers in our confusion in why you believe in the Bible. Do you see? Now if we can move away from this statement because that just seems to be your only defense against my early post.
Just thought about this one. So the authors of the Old Testament said God talk to them or they had a dream in which God spoke to them, this is how they came to write down their part of the Bible. Why are you Christians so quick to claim they are prophets and not just another loony who says "I talk to God." I mean so since the Bible has been written down, God no longer speaks to people? So God "wrote" this book and then just sat back?

 

First off.. try and get with the concept of forums and not be so greedy and unfair.
You effectively just made TWENTY TWO different posts, all of which require some fair consideration and replies.

The FIRST TOPIC you made was being dealt with first. Deal with it.

The very reason someone like Job is given reliability is BECAUSE he is claiming Divine revelation and BECAUSE he is writing AFTER other books (Like The Torah) are established.

This is a good thing because Job cant just 'make up' his own theology, rules and whatever he believes is true.
No.
He can be judged in light of already established accounts.

Same goes for Paul, Luke and Jesus Himself for that matter.

IF one 'loony' was to have written the entire bibliography by himself at one particular time period (like Mohammed) THEN YOU HAVE a good reason to ask more questions about their authority - after all, they have nothing to 'answer to'.
The Authors of the New Testament has Thousands of years and a very impressive and mixed jury to answer to!

.....

OK, Lets talk about your #1 difficulty re: Pauls epiphany on the road to Damascus.
Now, since its pretty apparent what was written and by whom - it doesnt seem like the Author (or even the original audience) acknowledge anything contradictory.
So that is odd?

I personally just imagined a scenario where at some point all are hearing the voice but then towards the 'specific message' only Paul is allowed to hear the words.
The writers dont break down the event into word-by-word accounts so certainly both statements can be true:
-They all heard the voice at some point
-Only Paul was hearing the voice at some point

Having said that - I came across an excellent analysis of the use of the word 'Hearing'.
If I can chip in first - I do notice the Greek language of that time does use the concept 'Hearing' in a slightly different way than we do.
Reminds me of the expression the Professors say these days "There is 'hearing' and then there is 'Listening"

I dont like to just 'paste' some article but in this case the author sums it up better than I would:

..................................

 

PROSECUTION

We are told in Acts 9:7 that the men journeying with Paul at the time of the event stood speechless, hearing the voice yet beholding no one. Yet in Acts 22:9 we read Paul saying ...

"And they that were with me beheld indeed the light, but they heard not the voice of Him that spake to me."



DEFENCE

It is true that in most Bibles, there appears to be a contradiction between what Paul said in Acts 9:7 and what he said in Acts 22:9. But first, let us remember who it was who wrote the Book of Acts and if Luke did not notice any contradiction between these verses, then it is quite possible that there is NO contradiction, whatever, in the Greek text which the author wrote down, and that, once again, the fault lies with the way in which it has been translated into English.

First let us look at this verb 'to hear' and then notice the way in which it is used throughout the New Testament. The Lexicons tell us that it is used in 3 distinct ways

1. to hear
2. to hear with understanding, or to understand by hearing
3. to hear and obey or to hear (which includes hearing and understanding) and obey.

And the lexicons also list several passages of Scripture, which illustrate the use of this verb in these differing shades of meaning even though the English translation may not reveal the true meaning accurately.

Such an example is John 8:43 in the A.V., where Jesus said to the Pharisees ...

"Why do ye not 'understand'(get to know) My speech(teaching)? Because ye cannot hear My word."

Now it is obvious that if Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees then -

a) they were not deaf, and

b) they must have been able to hear Him.

But it is equally obvious that since they could hear Jesus then what Jesus was saying was that the reason they did not 'get to know' His teaching was because they could not comprehend or understand what He taught. Therefore the verb 'to hear' in the second sentence of verse 43 would have made better sense if it had been translated as in (2) above, 'cannot understand'.

If this alternate meaning of the verb 'to hear' is applied to Acts 9:7 and 22:9, it will be found that the apparent 'contradiction' disappears. It will be noted from Acts 26:14 that "the voice" spoke to Paul in Hebrew, and those who were with Paul may not have been familiar with this tongue since the local languages were Aramaic and Greek at that time.

 

Then in Acts 22:9 we are told that the men with Paul did NOT (Greek - emphatic NOT)'hear' the voice, but in Acts 9:7 we are told that they DID'hear' the voice. Thus it should be obvious that - like the Pharisees of John 8:43 - they 'heard' the voice but did NOT understand what was said. Acts 22:9 would have made better sense in English had it been given its meaning (2) of 'to understand' instead of 'to hear'. This verse should have been translated as follows:

"Now the (ones) who were with me indeed saw the light but did not understand the voice of the One speaking to me".

It should be noted very carefully that the ability to understand what is heard can be distinctly implied, or as firmly negated, in Greek, simply by changing the Greek form in which the word 'voice' is written, and/or the syntax of the sentence. Furthermore, this ability to 'understand' can be negated or cancelled without in any degree cancelling the hearing of the 'voice' or the sound that is heard. It is the failure of almost all of the translators of our Bibles to note the different forms of the word 'voice' in Acts 9:7 and 22:9, and the syntax of the sentences. This has led to failure to translate the verb correctly, bringing about what appears to be a contradiction in English but which is not the case on the parts of either Paul who spoke the words, nor Luke who recorded them. Both men knew their Greek grammar better then the translators of our popular Bibles.

In Acts 9:7 the form of the word 'voice'definitely negates any ability to understand what the voice said (as is also the case in John 5:25 where all the dead will likewise fail to understand what the voice will say except "the ones hearing -AND understanding"). Therefore verse 7 should have been translated from the Greek text ...

"The men who were travelling with him stood speechless (with fright), hearing indeed the voice but neither understanding (it) nor seeing anyone (speaking)".

In Acts 22:7 the form of the word 'voice' would appear to negate the understanding by Paul. But this is not so here because the context records a conversation ensuing. It is apparent in this case that the form of the 'voice' is governed by a preposition which, in Greek idiom, need not be spoken or written. Paul "heard (from) a voice saying... ". This idiom occurs in many other passages - for example John 9:31, "God does not hear (from) sinners".

In Acts 22:9 the form of the word 'voice' most definitely implies both hearing and understanding, but only one of these faculties is negated by the Greek emphatic 'NOT'. Now the men with Paul were not deaf, so obviously they heard the voice, which undoubtedly was both thunderous and terrifying enough to render them speechless. Therefore it could only be their understanding of what the voice said which was negated, because nothing could have prevented them from hearing the voice itself. This agrees PERFECTLY with Acts 9:7.

Rev. W. K. Lowther-Clarke notes in his 'Concise Bible Commentary'

"That Paul was not a member of the Sanhedrin may be taken for granted. He was a leader among the Greek speaking Jews at Jerusalem who accepted Pharisaism in its strict form."

In view of this and the foregoing, the most likely explanation for the lack of understanding by those accompanying Paul would be because of a lingual ability that did not extend to the 'Hebrew' that our Lord spoke to Paul. There is NO contradiction here whatsoever, and the eminent scholars W. E. Vine and Cremer both attest this view on grammatical grounds.

 

Okay whatever I'm not even really going to argue on that one because all your post are were rambling thoughts of someone not facts (just to let you know). Ok so the person is imply that the men heard God just didn't understand what was happening. Are you God? Just wondering because whether or not you can say that the author did or did not know what was going on is a THEORY of critics or an excuse for Christians.

 

RIGHT ON BRE!!Yesterday I was feeling real guilty about questioning the Bible and God but I realized I need to continue questioning because some thing's just make no sense to me.I need to find my own way instead of feeling stuck with this religion that my parents forced upon me.Maybe I'll realize i need to be catholic or Budhist or non religious all together.

 

Can you please explain which part of the post you are 'letting me know' are not facts but rather ramblings?

Please dont gloss over this request - I would really like to know what part of that you disagree with?

Specify.

BTW.. please do not bother reminding us that we are speculating based on the available facts.
This is 'A given'

You on the other hand are drawing conclusions based on assumptions about the facts.
Its possible that at one point ALL heard the Voice
and
at another point ONLY Paul could hear the voice

It is demonstrated that the same writers use the word 'Heard' to describe 'Understanding' and not necessarily just Audible perception.

These ARE facts. period.

Is that what happened?

Based on the facts we can be assured its possibly.

YOU have decided to reject facts and draw a conclusion based on your own imagination?
Not me - I will let the facts dictate there is no necessary contradiction.

As far as I can tell - you are now admitting that the Pauline Epiphany is not a contradiction?

 

I knew that she would avoid the scriptures before and after the scripture she used for examples. This is common among people that complain about what they do not understand. I asked for 5 scriptues before and after each of her examples. If I took this sentance and posted it here on it's own, it wouldn't make sence. However, couple with the ones before it and now this one, you can clearly see me callign you a moron.

 

So the Christians among you think that your God is just toying with us for "Mysterious reasons", or to test your faith. If he's omniscient, doesn't he know how strong your faith is anyway? What kind of game is that? It's like pulling the legs off spiders...
For those with a slightly less blinkered world view, I think that suffering is just another part of the duality we are supposed to be trying to transcend. There is as much good in the world as bad, you just need to look for it.
And, yes, there are so many contradictions in the Bible. I particularly like the prohibition against cotton-polyester underwear. (See Leviticus).

 

Sorry, what or who are you refering to?

Sorry again but what are you talking about?

Cute insult

I dont disagree. Who are you explaining that too? Christians are aware of this and Christian teachings encourage us to look for good in the world.

No, there are not 'so many' contradictions in the Bible.

The Jewish dress code forbade mixing fabrics.
Please explain why this has anything to do with anything in your post.
Its not even in the realm of 'contradiction' so I wonder if you just felt like mentioning it out of the blue, or what?

 

You guys can argue all day with non-believers...I'm just going to pray for them all...Jesus loves everyone