|
Post by cervyy on May 24, 2006 1:29:33 GMT -5
Howdy y'all, just stoppin bye on this fine day. Had me some heathenos thinkings earlier when I was reading the Bible *GASP!* I was reading the Bible!!
Okays, on my way to an ortho appointment I got through all of Revelations. I decided to read it after I leafed to a page that promised a little bit on falsehood. It was near the middle of Revelations when I picked up a part on some peeps getting judged by their WORKS! I though, I must make sure to get this right so I real the whole of it.
*AHEM* according to my lil pocket sized New Testament "And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things written in the books." Revelations 20:12. I'm sorry, did that say they were judgded on their works??? On ... well, JUST works?? Not what I had been hearing ... I'd been told I had to be all repenty and stuff. And it says it in SEVEN other places how God judges 7 diff. churches based on their WORKS, but finds fault with them in OTHER places. What's with all the works-judging all of a sudden?
Also would like to point out that in that same passage is reference to Book of Life ... isn't that in Egypyian mythology? Could just as easily just have the same name. I can go for that ... but a few verses down and elsewhere in Rev. it mentions Hades, as a person. Now this I DO know is so totaly Greek god og the underworld. Why is Hades mentioned AS A BEING, not a place or another word for Hell??
'Nother Q I had concerning Rev. Chapter 20 (and this book is about the end of years for the world for those who don't know) prophesizes about (after all the nasty plagues come down and kill, like, A LOT of people) an angel locking up Satan for a thousand years and then setting him free. AFTER ll the plagues have ravaged the earth and people have been marked by the beast or by God, Satan gets canned for 1000 years ... how does this all play right? I always though, end of days meant BAM, we all either go up or down, no waiting one thousand years for Satan to pop back up ... and it says during that time span he'll still be decieving nations.
At first I though, oh, this happens BEFORE all the plagues and marking, but Chapter 20 starts "AND THEN ..."
Also, what's with all the weird creature referneces?? Is a dragon really gonna pop put of the ground and be all "I'm Satan! ROAR!"? Seems a tad ... not with the rest of the Bible. And there are other weird creatures poppin up too! One good creature (of 4 total and one is a lamb and THAT I get) is only describedas having a man's head. But it's not an actual man, but some CREATURE with a man's head ... and it's good. 'Splainy please? This all seems rather NOT Chrsitian, animals with people's heads and whatnot.
Also, I saw something on the Discovery channel during the winter about this book actually. It said that, coincidentaly, at the same time the dude was writing Revelations, one nasty ruler was being REALLY mean to Christians and only let people trade/sell with his money marked with 666 and stuff VERY similiar to what's listed there ... (or I think it was Revelations, if any book actually says the mark of the beast is 666, then it couldn have been that one). Basically, it made it look like this guy was writting all this and making THAT ruler way back when to be the cause of and/or facilitator of the end of the world. This goes along with my, can you really trust EVERYTHING in the Bible? Revelations, looking pretty unstable.
I anxiously await responses, but be warned, I am dealing with DIAL-UP (Satan incarnate) and will not respond for many moons.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on May 24, 2006 2:01:30 GMT -5
There are some who believe that Revelation is speaking mostly of events that happened in AD 70. This view is called preterist or partial preterist. I have heard some convincing arguments myself. I haven't come to a real conclusion on the matter. Eschatology - Study of End times. You could spend hours looking up that subject on the internet. You want some awesome audios about prophecy? Check out Chuck Missler at www.khouse.org. You gotta start in the old testament before understanding the new testament. Here is a good place to start: www.khouse.org/6640/BP007/Listen to the audios about Daniel's 70 weeks Parts 3, 4, and 5. In fact, if you want, because I know dial up is so slow, I can send you CDs with the messages on it. Just PM me. Miles
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 24, 2006 2:35:25 GMT -5
you want to know something ironic? your bible was pasted together by the church:
men. fallen men.
so, if no books are to be added or subtracted... ...then christians compromised their entire faith by determining themselves which books were sacred and which ones were heresy. you follow the rules of a bible...put together by fallen people like yourselves.
funny...that wuold explain a lot of history.
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 24, 2006 12:31:49 GMT -5
There are some who believe that Revelation is speaking mostly of events that happened in AD 70. This view is called preterist or partial preterist. I have heard some convincing arguments myself. I haven't come to a real conclusion on the matter. And that's what gets me. If he was referring to back then ... we're still around NOW. Even if you figure in the 1000 years of Satan's imprissionment ... then all hell should have broken loose, say, about 1070 AD give or take a couple of years right? We're a little passed that. So then if he was referring to the end of the world back then HAPPENING back then, why we still around today? If his prophesies in the Bible were supposed to have already taken place and didn't ... see where I'm trying to go with this but not quite doing it??
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on May 24, 2006 22:30:01 GMT -5
Have you listened to the audios yet?
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on May 24, 2006 22:33:50 GMT -5
You listen to some of those audios and anyone with a brain that work will realize that the Bible is not just some book written by mere men.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 25, 2006 8:36:10 GMT -5
i have read the bible. eleven times, and counting... i have also read the gnostic gospels, and other 'heretical' texts... i have also read the qur'an.
how do you know the bible is fact or fiction, unless you have something to compare it with...?
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 25, 2006 23:44:00 GMT -5
You listen to some of those audios and anyone with a brain that work will realize that the Bible is not just some book written by mere men. Dial-up slooooow and very evil. Besides, our current versions are.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 26, 2006 1:17:43 GMT -5
audios = recordings of man. my point is proven yet again.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on May 26, 2006 11:33:47 GMT -5
My favorite bible quote is from Malachi. Chapter 2, verse 3: Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces I love SAB: They have found 367 bible contradictions and counting. Not to mention Injustice Absurdity Cruelty and Violence Intolerance Family Values Women Science and History Interpretation Prophecy Sex Language Homosexuality you guys should check it out, a bible with the falacies pointed out: www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
|
|
|
Post by rsmportland on May 26, 2006 11:44:34 GMT -5
audios = recordings of man. my point is proven yet again. Golf clap.
|
|
|
Post by rsmportland on May 26, 2006 11:45:50 GMT -5
My favorite bible quote is from Malachi. Chapter 2, verse 3: Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces I love SAB: They have found 367 bible contradictions and counting. Not to mention Injustice Absurdity Cruelty and Violence Intolerance Family Values Women Science and History Interpretation Prophecy Sex Language Homosexuality you guys should check it out, a bible with the falacies pointed out: www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/If you beat it with a stick long enough, it will say anything you want it to.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on May 26, 2006 23:52:37 GMT -5
So how long have the christians been beating that thing?
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 27, 2006 7:37:44 GMT -5
christians? ...since about seventy a.d.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on May 28, 2006 16:28:26 GMT -5
So, since we're just short of 2000 years of beating it, I will go so far as to say that it does not say the same thing as it said before.
Since it can be changed, we cannot trust it. Pwned. lol
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on May 29, 2006 1:15:31 GMT -5
"Since it CAN be changed you cannot trust it?!" As a moderater I COULD change your words, so nobody here should trust them. In fact, nobody should believe you exist. If you can't trust the Bible as a historical document, then you can't trust any historical documents to be remotely accurate. Look at the facts. www.carm.org/questions/trustbible.htm
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on May 29, 2006 1:38:13 GMT -5
No religious book is accepted as historical documentation.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 29, 2006 7:12:33 GMT -5
i disagree, atheist, i will testify as a 'heathen' on this site who has an in-depth knowledge of sacred texts...i would estimate that over half is historically accurate.
a good example is geneaologies, wars, peoples and cultures...
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on May 29, 2006 13:15:39 GMT -5
Ok, let me rephrase what I said.
No religious book is accepted as historical documentation, without a pinch of salt....
Take out the walking on water, the wine, and all that other b/s, and yea, you might have a bit of history.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on May 29, 2006 13:29:51 GMT -5
The Bible has withstood the test of time is a better historically accurate document of history than ANY other ancient documents. ABB, no serious historian will agree with you on your claim.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on May 29, 2006 13:35:18 GMT -5
Didn't I agree with you? Yes, the bible is a historical document.
No, it is not all fact.
Why?
No serious historian will agree that people walk on water.
No serious historian will agree that god decided to beep with the people at babel for some tower. Etc.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on May 29, 2006 14:12:58 GMT -5
...or that a supernatural being had his way with a human female and conceived a child who would die for the 'sins' of humanity and then rise from the dead...yet still be the same god.
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on May 31, 2006 19:06:50 GMT -5
"Since it CAN be changed you cannot trust it?!" As a moderater I COULD change your words, so nobody here should trust them. In fact, nobody should believe you exist. If you can't trust the Bible as a historical document, then you can't trust any historical documents to be remotely accurate. Look at the facts. www.carm.org/questions/trustbible.htmI've noticed this phrase a lot and it's true. You have to take any "historical" document with a grain of salt. The farther you go back in history, the less documents we have. They may not be much but they can give us a hint as to what happened then, but not, you don't know if you can trust them. It can be argued that we don't even know for sure if what we know of recent events is true. I had a non-trad classmate in two of my classes this past semester and he had done some research into the twin towers being attacked and said it looked like there was a conspiracy behind it (shorter version of transpired events, but he said basiacally that). Not really sure i believe it, but how many times on history does the cpnspiracy argument come up? A lot. It just goes to show that people can be untrustworthy and lie to the world. All for their own selfish reasons, to stay in power or even to get power. And look at the kind of following the Bible has. I've always jokingly said that if I were to take over the world, it would be through religion. I coulod never actually pull it off, but it's worked for others in the past. Get people to follow a god and climb on their backs to the top. Ya, you could change what I say. Exactly my point! Thanks for agreeing. Ya, I may not actually exist, "CervyY" could just be a false pen-name for some crazy "Christian" to give himself or herself someone to argue against. By admiting that you, a person in power, COUKL change what I say only proves my point. A small dose of skepticism is a GREAt thing.
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on May 31, 2006 21:58:11 GMT -5
Unfortunately for your case, I have met you in person and there are eyewitness accounts. Cervyy isn't your real name, but that doesn't matter. There were plenty of eyewitness accounts to the crucifiction, Jesus' life, etc. There are also plenty of events in history that prove that the prophecies in the Bible are true. If God can know the future exactly as it happens and orchestrate events, and create everything in the universe, I have no problem at all believeing he not only can but has preserved his words for all mankind.
|
|
|
Post by cervyy on Jun 1, 2006 0:44:59 GMT -5
I'll agree that I see no reason to say Jesus didn't exist. Way with ya there. I might even be one of the few "heathens" on this board do say I also believe his daddy was the one and only.
I've recently wondered ... and this is just me thinking, but you've got what the Bible says something will happen. You then have one fanatical relgious nut later on trying to bring about what the Bible said would happen, BECAUSE he read it would happen in the Bible. Of course I can't say that happened, but it I wonder now if that's how some stuff may have happened. And if so (IF, let's taking a trip down imagination alley) is that still real prophesy? I would think that it should be independant for it to be a real prophesy ... just wondering.
In my defense of the name though, Cervy (or similar variation of) is how I go by just about everywhere I am on the Internet. You happen upon that name somewhere else, it's probably me. I like consistancy.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Jun 1, 2006 1:21:26 GMT -5
Thanks for telling us, but can you show us and prove it? And therein lies the problem!
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on Jun 1, 2006 4:23:10 GMT -5
christians thought armageddon was going to happen at Y2K...Y2K man!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Miles Lewis on Jun 2, 2006 0:06:48 GMT -5
Thanks for telling us, but can you show us and prove it? And therein lies the problem! I already answered the above questions with the eyewitness accounts. You accepted multiple corraborating eyewitness acounts as evidence for Julius Ceasar, no? What is the problem with the second statement? This addresses both of ABB's and Cervyy's comment: Cervyy, your thinking might be reasonable if you know anyone who has ever controlled where they were born, to whom they were born, including all their grandparents, all the events they would do and all the events that would be done to them. (Very few of these does any individual have control over) Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies about the coming messiah. Here is a link to a few of the prophecies. www.carm.org/bible/prophecy.htm"But they are soo accurate and there is no way to know they weren't written after the events actually happened" some would say... Nope. We have the Septuigint, which is the entire OT in Greek which is dated to the 3rd century BC. Secondly, where in the world would the entire Jewish culture of the day have come from if the writings in the OT did not exist during the time of Jesus? They knew the scriptures even then. It was either in this thread or another Cervyy that you asked how they determined the text we have for the NT to be 95 - 99.5% accurate. This is done by cross checking all the copies and finding differences. This article explains it a little better and compares it to others. www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htmThe real clincher, the most amazing prophecy in the word of God is found in Daniel chapter 9. It predicts precisely the exact day and year that the "messiah would be cut off". You can look that up yourself and do the math (remeber to use lunar years). Or you can listen to this audio that I have recommended more than once by Chuck Missler about Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy: www.khouse.org/6640/BP006/There is yet more depth into the amazing inspired word of God. Time would fail me to explain how when Jesus prophecied "Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the son of man be lifted up..." that he referenced an interesting event in biblical history. In the wilderness, God told Moses to put a serpent on a pole, this pole actually was in the shape of a cross. The serpent represents sin, even in the OT. Picture it in your mind, what does it look like. It is a piture or a type of the essence of the gospel, that Christ became sin for us and was hung on a cross and lifted up. Did this event in the Bible that happened nearly 1000 years before Christ's crucifiction just happen by chance? I think not. The word of God is just that, the Word of God. I have had just about enough debating with you, your blood is indeed free from my hands. You may not live to see tomorrow, I don't want you to end up in hell and neither do you. You only have one chance to be correct about all your silly objections that are about as impressive as a two man wave at the Super Bowl. You're betting your soul on foolishness. When someone you are close to dies, maybe then you will think seriously about eternity. Maybe not. Maybe you will die tomorrow, you never know. In order to understand the Bible though you need to have the spirit of truth that the world cannot receive. God says he gives his spirit to all those who obey him. You will never see the kingdom of God if you don't humble yourself as a child. I prefer the foolishness of the cross anyday to the world's psuedowisdom. The fool truly has said in his heart "there is no God". At the end of the day it hardly matters if you have read the most books, recieved the most degrees, won all the debates, have showed everyone in the world that they are wrong, or have more toys than the Joneses. What matters is when your head hits the pillow is your conscience clear, are you right with God? Check out www.livingwaters.com/good.
|
|
|
Post by HSTN2983 on Jun 2, 2006 7:07:37 GMT -5
miles, so you know, in the arena of law...eyewitness accounts are the least accepted form of evidence.
|
|
|
Post by atheistbibleburner on Jun 2, 2006 10:51:42 GMT -5
If we met in real life, I could demonstrate their unreliability. But here, you could try:
Remember the last person who entered your room, who is not there right now. You must not know who this person is. Answer the following questions, no guessing. You need to be as accurate as possible. (Height and age can be approximate)
Height? Age? Eye color? Hair color? Skinny? Fat? Shirt color? Pants color? Pants or shorts? Accessories? Actions? Time? Time in? Time out? Purpose? Shoe color? Shoe brand? Sandals? Long hair? Short hair? Hair style?
You need to be able to reliably answer all of those questions with little to no doubt to be able to qualify as a good eye-witness.
|
|