Go Back   Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) > Project Camelot Forum > Project Camelot > Off-Topic

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-18-2008, 02:21 PM   #26
Samson
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 34
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

bible.jpg
click on the picture to read the warning
Samson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 02:53 PM   #27
arcora
Banned
 
arcora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 696
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Attachment 124
click on the picture to read the warning
Which are your favorite books for finding knowledge?
arcora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 03:13 PM   #28
bostonirish22
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: at school
Posts: 11
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

What you have to understand about the Bible is that it wasn't written by God himself. It was written by men who were prophets, holy men, and apostles of Jesus. Everything that is written was also translated, so it depends on the version you get. The Catholic ones are probably the ones that are closest to the real thing, on account of them not taking things out and twisting things around. Also, you need to take what is written with a grain of salt. It is mostly not to be taken literally. Most things written in the Bible are metaphors. It's like reading poetry, you have to read it, and translate it in your own mind to make it make sense for you. When reading the Bible, you have to have an open mind and read it more with your soul than with your brain.

I hope that helps.

<3 Tara
bostonirish22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 03:17 PM   #29
murnut
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Philly
Posts: 179
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bostonirish22 View Post
What you have to understand about the Bible is that it wasn't written by God himself. It was written by men who were prophets, holy men, and apostles of Jesus. Everything that is written was also translated, so it depends on the version you get. The Catholic ones are probably the ones that are closest to the real thing, on account of them not taking things out and twisting things around. Also, you need to take what is written with a grain of salt. It is mostly not to be taken literally. Most things written in the Bible are metaphors. It's like reading poetry, you have to read it, and translate it in your own mind to make it make sense for you. When reading the Bible, you have to have an open mind and read it more with your soul than with your brain.

I hope that helps.

<3 Tara
Wow, great post!

You have got it exactly right.

Kudos
murnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 03:22 PM   #30
motov
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 115
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

i have reed the bible many times and its an amassing book, the storys are just good.... but i dont buy the divine of GOD, but i may picture God (and jesus) as highly enlighten, spiritual and technological entity(`s) guiding men, but still mortal..
the bible is also an "victim" of censorship, it should have included all scripts and not only few selected...
motov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 03:29 PM   #31
arcora
Banned
 
arcora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 696
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by motov View Post
i have reed the bible many times and its an amassing book, the storys are just good.... but i dont buy the divine of GOD, but i may picture God (and jesus) as highly enlighten, spiritual and technological entity(`s) guiding men, but still mortal..
the bible is also an "victim" of censorship, it should have included all scripts and not only few selected...
If a mortal created the universe, who created Him?
arcora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 03:41 PM   #32
motov
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 115
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arcora View Post
If a mortal created the universe, who created Him?
hi
yes i was waiting for that one...
i do not believe that god created the universe, i think thats more of an extreme complicated proses, but the theme of creation in the bible i think is a more lokal event, in the way of terraforming or just seeding out solar system, and transcripting the terms to an human understandeble realm, like night and day sea and sky..and so forth..
tnx
motov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 04:34 PM   #33
Norval
Banned
 
Norval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On a boat in Tacoma, wa, usa
Posts: 394
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Puts on the rubber boots and wades in. Waves a hand at Musado.

First I would like to point out that this thread demonstrates certain specific tactics of "agents" in forums This one is added to our research list, thank you all.

Bostonirish22 mentions the Catholic bible,
Quote:
The Catholic ones are probably the ones that are closest to the real thing, on account of them not taking things out and twisting things around.
Actually they have taken out several books that were in the "bibles" prior to 1610 2nd Esdras being one of them. You are correct in that it is a good reading bible. I have the St. Joseph's Student Edition. But the one I use most is the NRSV with Apocrypha (protestant extra books) and Deuterocanonicals (catholic extra books) with 84 books in it, like the Russians and Greeks, and most others except for the USA. But keep researching about the bible as you no doubt have.

Considering what many are now investigating about the bible and ET connection, I would take it seriously.
Norval is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 04:42 PM   #34
Norval
Banned
 
Norval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On a boat in Tacoma, wa, usa
Posts: 394
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

The Gods that created us are probably of the oldest ET beings. "Ancient of days" type of idea. As the bible points out other beings have been created also.

Where the first sentient intelligent life may have come from is unknown.

What is known is that those that created us, also created the universe of over 400 billion galaxies in it. Quite the work.
Norval is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 05:02 PM   #35
murnut
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Philly
Posts: 179
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norval View Post
Puts on the rubber boots and wades in. Waves a hand at Musado.

First I would like to point out that this thread demonstrates certain specific tactics of "agents" in forums This one is added to our research list, thank you all.

Bostonirish22 mentions the Catholic bible,


Actually they have taken out several books that were in the "bibles" prior to 1610 2nd Esdras being one of them. You are correct in that it is a good reading bible. I have the St. Joseph's Student Edition. But the one I use most is the NRSV with Apocrypha (protestant extra books) and Deuterocanonicals (catholic extra books) with 84 books in it, like the Russians and Greeks, and most others except for the USA. But keep researching about the bible as you no doubt have.

Considering what many are now investigating about the bible and ET connection, I would take it seriously.


LOL...the real agents have better things to do.

And I agree with the rest of your post
murnut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 05:10 PM   #36
Orion Morris
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 416
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

I am not a religious person, to the extent that I believe in a single judgemental king that we call countless different names. I feel like the bible along with other religious texts are metaphores and are written in a non literal sense. Then you have to take into account that it is read in english which is not the language it was written in. Then it was translated by people in power and used to controll people. However, I still have a hard time arguing with right and wrong. The bible says that if you are good and you accept god into your heart you will go to heaven. This seems like a metaphore for the law of the universe, or karma; if you fight against the positive energy of the universe than you will feel pain or hell. Forgiveness and love will bring you into the light. How can anybody argue that. God comes from the sky and many people on this fourm feel like knowlege or et's came from the sky or heavens. I feel like the bible along with every other sacred text or teaching is a message of metaphore to show us how to treat eachother and live in this cosmic plane. Granted that man has had their hands on these books for a very long time now and I am sure that the message is twisted. I still feel that these books should not be discredited and infact we can learn from them as long as we keep in the context of the world we live in now.
Orion Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 05:37 PM   #37
Orion Morris
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 416
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Something else to ponder about is the fact that alot of the sacred books that were should have been shown to us were never put in the bible.
Orion Morris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 06:06 PM   #38
bostonirish22
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: at school
Posts: 11
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

I was just saying that the Catholic Bible's Old Testament, the bible I have, includes the Torah, whereas other denominations take out several books of the Torah.
bostonirish22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 06:12 PM   #39
bostonirish22
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: at school
Posts: 11
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

This may sound off topic, but if you want help understanding God or the Bible, read the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis.
I read them all about a year ago, and they are truly enlightening. If you read them all you'll see what I mean, especially when you reach the last book.
haha.
bostonirish22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 06:18 PM   #40
sfth13
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 99
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

I watched this video on youtube from Michael Tsarion which gives a different outlook on who is behind religion and humanities evils

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AhbG...eature=related

it's in 13 parts abot 8-10 min. each it's another point of view to think about
sfth13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 07:53 PM   #41
Stabris8
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 60
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Some facts regarding some of the Bible...

The external evidence test

Was the New Testament discredited by modern discoveries?

I’ve heard it said that New Testament passages are inaccurate,
unhistorical or unscientific.

That used to be claimed… because often the New Testament was the only source for such statements. But there’s no excuse now. Some modern writers are lying about this matter.

And others are ignorant of the facts. But
let me fill you in with what’s been happening...

Five porticos at the Bethesda pool

The book of John (5:1-15) relates how Jesus healed an invalid by
the pool at Bethesda, which John describes as having five porticoes
(colonnaded porches). Because no such place had been found, critics were fond of asserting that John was wrong.

Then one day the pool was found and excavated. And you know
what? Archaeologists discovered five porticoes – exactly as John
had described. (Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998,
p. 99
)

The census at Jesus’ birth

Again, critics argued that Luke’s portrayal of events surrounding
the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:1-3) was wrong. The critics asserted
there was no census, that Quirinius was not governor of Syria at
that time, but later. And that everyone did not have to return to his
ancestral home for taxing.
However, archaeological discoveries have since shown that:

1. Regular enrollment of taxpayers, as well as a 14-year census,
were begun under the emperor Augustus, just as Luke
wrote.

2. Quirinius was governor twice, including the time Luke says.

3. The conduct of a census did require that people return to
their homes to complete the family registration. (A papyrus
has now been found in Egypt confirming this.) (Josh McDowell,
The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. Nashville: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1999, pp. 63,64)


Alleged geographical “mistakes”...
Again, it was believed that Luke was wrong in implying that
Lystra and Derbe (but not Iconium) were in Lycaonia (Acts 14:6).
They based their criticism upon a statement by Cicero.
Then Sir William Ramsay found a monument that confirmed
Luke’s statement. (Joseph P. Free, Archaeology and Bible History. Wheaton:
Scripture Press, 1969, p. 317)

Nazareth existing in first century
Yet, despite the mountain of evidence supporting the truth of the
New Testament accounts, there are still some writers who peddle
the same outdated nonsense to us.
Thus, in one of David Icke’s books, he says concerning the first
century, that ‘NAZARETH DID NOT EXIST AT THAT TIME.’
(David Icke, The Big Secret. Wildwood, MO.: Bridge of Love Publications, USA, p.99)
Oh, do come on. The place was so real between the years AD 44
and 50, that it merited an emperor’s decree carved in stone and
directed probably at the people living there.
How do we know? From Nazareth, Jesus’ home town, there came to light in 1878 a
most interesting slab of marble, inscribed in a Greek text. For many years it lay in the
Froehner collection, its value unrecognized until 1930. It is now in the Louvre, Paris.

The text contains a decree issued by an unnamed Roman emperor
prohibiting under penalty of death, any kind of tomb robbery,
including tombs of relatives, or the moving of a body to another
place. It reads:

Ordinance of Caesar. It is my pleasure that graves and
tombs remain undisturbed in perpetuity for those who
have made them for the cult of their ancestors, or
children or members of their house. If, however, any
man lay information that another has either
demolished them, or has in any other way extracted
the buried, or maliciously transferred them to other
places in order to wrong them, or has displaced the
sealing or other stones, against such a one I order that
a trial be instituted as in respect of the gods, as in
regard to the cult of mortals. For it shall be much
more obligatory to honor the buried. Let it be
absolutely forbidden for anyone to disturb them. In the
case of contravention I desire that the offender be
sentenced to capital punishment on charge of violation
of sepulture.

What date is that inscription?
It has been placed somewhere between AD 44 and 50, which was
during the reign of Claudius Caesar, who was noted for his
persecution of the Jews. This was not many years after the death of
Jesus.

It is believed that the preaching of the resurrection had already
begun in Rome by this time. Perhaps this decree reflected the fact
that the enemies of Christianity had faced up to the empty tomb
story.

The placing of the decree on a rock in the little, unimportant town
of Nazareth where Jesus was reared, indicates a possible
relationship between the decree of Caesar and the empty tomb of
Jesus.

Nazareth did not exist at that time? This discovery knocks that
claim on the head!”
Alleged personality “mistakes”

Interesting, isn’t it? The critic shouts himself hoarse. Archaeology
comes along. And the New Testament is vindicated. It happens
time and again. That’s a one-sided contest, if you ask me.

Here’s another example. Luke had claimed that Lysanius, the
tetrarch of Abilene, ruled Syria and Palestine (Luke 3:1) at the start
of John the Baptist’s ministry in AD 27.
The only Lysanius known to ancient historians was one who was
killed in BC 36. So Luke was accused of being mistaken.
However, an inscription now found at Abila near Damascus
speaks of “Freedman of Lysanias the Terarch”, and is dated
between AD 14 and 29. (F.F. Bruce, “Archaeological Confirmation of the New
Testament”. In Carl Henry, ed., Revelation and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1969, p. 321)

Want more examples?:
Paul makes mention of the Corinth city treasurer, Erastus
(Romans 16:23). During excavations at Corinth in 1929, a
pavement was found inscribed: ERASTVS PRO:AED:S:P:
STRAVIT (‘Erastus, curator of public buildings, laid this
pavement at his own expense.’) (F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents:
Are They Reliable? Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter Varsity Press, 1964, p. 95)

Luke gives to Publius, the chief man in Malta, the title ‘first man
of the island’ (Acts 28:7). Inscriptions have been unearthed that do
give him the title of ‘first man’. (F.F. Bruce, “Archaeological Confirmation of
the New Testament”. In Carl Henry, ed., Revelation and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker
Book House, 1969, p. 325)

Luke was assumed to be wrong for using the term politarchs to
denote the civil authorities of Thessalonica (Acts 17:6) – because
‘politarch’ is not found in classical literature. However, there have
now been found some 19 inscriptions that make use of that title.

One of the inscriptions was discovered in a Roman arch at
Thessalonica and in it are found the names of six of that city’s
politarchs. (Ibid., pp. 325,360)

Pontius Pilate
The New Testament records that Pontius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea when
Jesus was crucified (AD 31).
However Icke the critic claims that ‘Pontius’ was a fictitious name invented only after
AD 85. Icke also asserts that the Gospel of Luke was written after this date.
Icke claims that a man called Pliny visited a place called Pontus from the year AD 85
onwards ‘and this is the origin of the first name of Pontius Pilate. He was only called
Pilate in Matthew and Mark,… but in Luke, the one Piso wrote with Pliny, Pilate
suddenly acquires the name, Pontius. Luke was written in the very years that Pliny began
to visit Pontus.’ (David Icke, The Big Secret. Wildwood, MO.: Bridge of Love
Publications, USA, p. 110)
Thank you, David Icke for that contribution. So is Icke right? Or
the Gospel of Luke? Now let archaeology be the referee…

His name on historic inscription:
In 1961, at the city of Caesarea, an Italian excavation uncovered a huge block of
limestone. It bore an inscription containing the name – wait for it - ‘Pontius Pilate’. The
block, probably from the period of Emperor Tiberius (AD 12 to 37) is engraved with the
words:
………S TIBERIEVM [Tiberieum]
……[PO]NTIVS PILATVS [Pontius Pilate]
[PRA]ECTVS IVDA[EA]E [Prefect Judea]

The first word, ‘Tiberieum’, probably refers to a temple dedicated
to the emperor Tiberius.
Mentioned by Roman historian:
Is that all? Not quite. The well known Roman historian, Cornelius
Tacitus (born around 52 AD), also mentions Pontius Pilate, and
states that Pontius Pilate crucified Jesus Christ. In 112 AD, Tacitus
became Governor of Asia. He wrote in his history:

Nothing which could be done by man, nor any amount
of treasure that the prince could give, nor all the
sacrifices which could be presented to the gods, could
clear Nero from being believed to have ordered the
burning, the fire of Rome. So to silence the rumor, he
tortured and made false accusations against those who
were called the Christians, who were hated for their
large following. Christus, the founder of the name, was
executed by Pontius Pilate, the Judean procurator,
during the rule of Tiberius. [AD 14 to AD 37] (Tacitus,
Annals, 15:44; cited by Justin Martyr, Apology, 1.48. Emphasis added)

He further says:
At his coming the lame shall leap, tongues that stammer shall
speak clearly, the blind shall see, and the lepers shall be
cleansed, and the dead shall rise and walk about. And you
can learn that he did all these things from the Acts of Pontius
Pilate.
Pontius Pilate a fictitious name invented after AD 85? Icke,
what’s got into you?

Summary
Colin Hemer, a noted Roman historian, has catalogued numerous
archaeological and historical confirmations of Luke’s accuracy.

His report is voluminous and detailed. His research includes:

· Specialised details, which would not have been widely
known except to a CONTEMPORARY researcher such as
Luke who traveled widely. For example, exact titles of
officials, identification of army units, and information about
major routes.
· Details which archaeologists know are accurate but cannot
verify as to the precise time period. Some of these are
unlikely to have been known except to a writer who had
visited the districts.
· Correlation of known kings and governors with the
chronology of the narrative.
· Facts appropriate to the date of a contemporary but not to a
date earlier or later.
· ‘Undesigned coincidents’ between the writings of Luke and
Paul.
· Other materials, the ‘immediacy’ of which suggests that the
author was recounting a recent experience, rather than
shaping or editing a text long after it had been written.
· Cultural or idiomatic items now known to be peculiar to the
first century atmosphere, but not later. (Colin Hemer, The Book of
Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990,
pp.104-107)

One archaeologist carefully studied Luke’s references. He
discovered that Luke names 32 countries, 54 cities and 9 islands
without an error! (Norman L. Geisler and Thomas Howe, When Critics Ask.
Wheaton, Ill.: Victor, 1992, p. 385)

Ramsay the skeptic
One of the greatest archaeologists
of all time was Sir William Ramsay.

As a student in the German historical school of the midnineteenth
century, Ramsay was firmly convinced that the New
Testament book of Acts was a fraudulent product of the midsecond
century AD.

In his research to make a topographical study of Asia Minor, he
was compelled to consider the New Testament writings of Luke.
Here is how he relates his experience...

I began with a mind unfavourable to it… but more
recently I found myself brought into contact with the
Book of Acts as an authority for the topography,
antiquities and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually
borne upon me that in various details the narrative
showed marvellous truth. In fact, beginning with a fixed
idea that the work was essentially a second century
composition, and never relying on its evidence as
trustworthy for first century conditions, I gradually
came to find it a useful ally in some obscure and
difficult investigations. (Edward Musgrave Blaiklock, Layman’s
Answer: An Examination of the New Theology. London: Hodder and
Stoughton, 1968, p. 36 – quoted from Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and
the Roman Citizen)

You know, guys, as a result of that, Ramsay was
forced to do a complete reversal of his beliefs. He concluded after
thirty years of study that ‘Luke is a historian of the first rank; not
merely are his statements of fact trustworthy… this author should
be placed along with the greatest of historians.’ (Sir W. M. Ramsay, The
Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament. London:
Hodder and Stoughton, 1915, p. 222)

Luke’s “unsurpassed… trustworthiness”

In fact, Ramsay concluded that ‘Luke’s history is unsurpassed in
respect of its trustworthiness.’ (W. M. Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and the
Roman Citizen. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962, p. 81)
Since then, further discoveries have shown New Testament
writers such as Luke to be careful historians.

The verdict of Roman historian A.N. Sherwin-White. He declares:
For Acts [in the New Testament] the confirmation of
historicity is overwhelming…. Any attempt to reject its
basic historicity must now appear absurd. Roman
historians have taken it for granted. (A.N. Sherwin-White,
Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, reprint edition.
Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1978, p. 189)

Dr Gleason Archer undertook a painstakingly detailed
investigation into this question. Notice his report:

As I have dealt with one apparent discrepancy after
another and have studied the alleged contradictions
between the biblical record and the evidence of
linguistics, archaeology, or science, my confidence in
the trustworthiness of Scripture has been repeatedly
verified and strengthened by the discovery that almost
every problem in Scripture that has ever been
discovered by man, from ancient times until now, has
been dealt with in a completely satisfactory manner by
the biblical text itself – or else by objective
archaeological information. The deductions that may be
validly drawn from ancient Egyptian, Sumerian, or
Akkadian documents all harmonize with the biblical
record. (Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982, p. 12)

And former skeptic Josh McDowell adds his testimony:
After trying to shatter the historicity and validity of the
Scripture, I came to the conclusion that it is historically
trustworthy. If one discards the Bible as being
unreliable, then one must discard almost all literature of
antiquity.
One problem I constantly face is the desire on the part
of many to apply one standard or test to secular
literature and another to the Bible. One must apply the
same test, whether the literature under investigation is
secular or religious.
Having done this, I believe we can…say, ‘The Bible is
trustworthy and historically reliable. (Josh McDowell, The
New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. Nashville: Thomas Nelson
Publishers, 1999, p. 68)

What gets to me is the way the critics try to hide all this evidence from us. Is it because they suffer
from a lack of integrity? Or more likely that they’re just quoting someone else who is as ignorant as they
are?
These very critics you put your trust in, are not going to help you survive death. But that Deliverer they
like to attack so much – what if He really is the only answer to man’s problems?

Jonathan Gray
http://www.beforeus.com
Stabris8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2008, 08:57 PM   #42
ForsakenFalcon
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hideing From The Clandestine Dark Suit's!
Posts: 190
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

[QUOTE=Norval;18709]Puts on the rubber boots and wades in. Waves a hand at Musado.

First I would like to point out that this thread demonstrates certain specific tactics of "agents" in forums This one is added to our research list, thank you all.
[QUOTE]


Wow accusation's on a extreme level, If I were a Disinformation Agent I'd get paided for this ****, Sadly I don't so no....no "Agents" here.
ForsakenFalcon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 01:48 AM   #43
Norval
Banned
 
Norval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On a boat in Tacoma, wa, usa
Posts: 394
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

uhmmmm sorry.

There is no way I was thinking of anyone in particular. That research and investigation is after the collection of posters methodologies.

Last edited by Norval; 09-19-2008 at 01:51 AM.
Norval is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 02:05 AM   #44
Norval
Banned
 
Norval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: On a boat in Tacoma, wa, usa
Posts: 394
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bostonirish22 View Post
This may sound off topic, but if you want help understanding God or the Bible, read the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis.
I read them all about a year ago, and they are truly enlightening. If you read them all you'll see what I mean, especially when you reach the last book.
haha.
Torah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah

bostonirish22
What a fantastic collection of writings. Have read them to many young ones over the years. Makes one want to go looking through old attics.

Yet, you may want to do more research about bibles. Moses's first five books of the bibles, the basic Torah, are in all most all bibles I have read. Actually, in all of the bibles I have read. (sighs, I really need a life, , about a couple dozen)

Stabris8
Nice posting of info there.
Norval is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 02:11 AM   #45
PodWORLD
Avalon Senior Member
 
PodWORLD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 171
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

I grew up catholic and read the bible many times as a child.

A rip-roaring read full of grandeur, intrigue, politics and begatting.

I remember walking to church every morning before school for lent one year because I felt pretty strongly about my faith.
When I turned 13 I felt differently.

Faith in God is to be respected as is the choice not to believe in that God which isn't a lack of faith but a belief in something else.



The 'bible' was created at Nicea over several councils was it not.

It tried to cover a lot of bases and erase some others in the name of empire and control.

Jesus was created to satisfy the pagan element being a hybrid of many
of their beliefs - Horus, Krishna and Hebus.

The faith matters not the book because it's not the word of God nor does it claim to be. It's a work of man and as flawed as we are but in the end
we are all Brothers and Sisters and we should respect each other as such.
PodWORLD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 02:58 AM   #46
JohnWdoe
Avalon Senior Member
 
JohnWdoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 191
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

I always say,

One must understand the concept of the breaking of the bread.

Simple,Efficient,Philosophical.
JohnWdoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 03:00 AM   #47
Frank Samuel
Project Avalon Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: i live in puerto rico
Posts: 643
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

The Bible is a spiritual uplifting, Holy Book. I study the bible since my childhood, and to my amazement some things are true ,other things are just plain and simple fairy tales. No offense. We as human can be divinely inspire but we do not have all the answers.When the Bible was cannonized at the council of Nicea a theology was agreed upon which in reality was 360 degrees
from what the experience of the real Teachers of that time was, for example Jesus mother, many holy books are kept from public view and even burned.
We are getting half truth base on the understanding of the Theology form at the council of nicea. A real shame if you ask me. Nevertheless God, Prime Creator,the Origin, The first dude, or whatever you wish to call him is found here in the Bible highly restricted to a narrow view. While the story of our Origin is so much more incredible. Bible Doom's Day , has created the chosen ones vs. the unchosen, Great idea hah. Dominion of fear by the use of religion
using God to promote me the CHOSEN ONE.
Asking questions , meditation and yes divine inspiration will unlock the true secrets of the Bible or for use of a better word the universe. The problem is that when I think myself to be the only one who is divinely inspire, Oh hell,
my ego got in the way of my inspiration and so creates the flaw in my divine inspiration. 7 billion interpretations of the truth.....

Last edited by Frank Samuel; 09-19-2008 at 02:05 PM.
Frank Samuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 04:40 AM   #48
bostonirish22
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: at school
Posts: 11
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

i had a nice long talk with my best friend and my dad the other day, about the bible and the differences between the catholic one and some of the protestant ones. and i know that there are versions they use that do not include parts of the old testament. so stop shutting down what i know to be fact before you frustrate me to tears. yeah, the ones you read may have been "whole," but all i'm TRYING to say is that there are some that aren't.
bostonirish22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 12:15 PM   #49
Stabris8
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 60
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norval View Post
Torah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah

Stabris8
Nice posting of info there.
Thanks! this subject is of great interest to me! In addition, I do love to read and research; if nothing else but to verify my personal curiosity on a wide variety of topics!
Stabris8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2008, 12:58 PM   #50
utarion
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 34
Default Re: How can We take the Bible seriously?

The fact is this. The bible has remained true in its entirety. Can man be trusted?

Romans 3:4
Not at all! Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: "So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge."

Jesus fullfilled over 300 prophecsies about himself which he was destined to fullfill. I say if you are going to be trusting anyone in the entire history of this world then I cannot think of anyone but the Lord Yeshua Messiah.

Matthew 5:18
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Deuteronomy 29:29
The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.

John 15:7
If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you.
utarion is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon