The Bible

[scouterjim]

And you're not listening.

He did not...."mellow." He EXPANDEDthe Commandments of God.

Example, the 10 Commandments said "thou shalt not commit adultery." You think adultery starts with the act? No way, said Jesus.

Jesus' explanation on that: you already commit adultery if you entertain wet dreams about the other person's spouse!

Does that sound being "mellow" to you?

I don't know what you mean about that ganja word. For all I know you're talking about voodoo!

Cite the passage!

Ganja is marijuana. You know, smoking it mellows you out? You still haven't answered my question. Why was God so mean and bloodthirsty in the OT, but all kindness in the NT?

[segnosaur]

More appropriately, this is the interpretation that you have decided to follow.

And of course, it is an interpretation you reject.

Actually I'm not accepting or rejecting any interpretation.

The point is... once you have a book where you have to do any interpretation, then that book is no longer "indisputable", as it now based in part on the ideals of the interpreter rather than the author.

Furthermore, I also included ACTS 15

Ummm.... so? I never used Acts 15 when I was pointing out contradictions in gods law!!!!. What you're doing is presenting a red herring!

and clearly they're talking about the Mosaic Law with circumcision as an example! Go ahead and check out a Bible.

I did. That's how I found all those contradictions that you keep pretending aren't there. Things like differences in the order of creation in Genesis, differences in the way Judas died or who the paternal grandfather of Jebus was in the New testament.

Yes, nothing contrived.... and yet considering the thousands of years it remained consistent.

Like in the way it was totally consistent in stating who Joseph's father was? Oh wait. It wasn't consistent at all.

Or how about in the way Judas died? Oh, wait... it wasn't consistent there either.

But at least genesis was consistent. Oh, wait... that's not consistent either. It can't get the order of creation right.

FACT: NOTHING HOLDS UP THE EARTH. IT'S AFFECTED BY GRAVITY.

Yet in Psalm 18 it refers to "The foundations of the world". Ummm... the earth doesn't have a "foundation"

Because you're reading the wrong "foundation."

"foundations of the world" is not the same as "foundation" of a house.

...

And it is within the context of moral grounds.

Actually, once again you're wrong about context.

Earlier in Psalm 18 it specifically mentions "foundations" as the tangible base, associating them with the "hills". So obviously you're not dealing with "moral grounds" if you're talking about foundations for hills and earthquakes.

FACT: THE EARTH IS ROUND.

Yet in the new testament the devil brings Jebus to the top of a mountain to see "all the kingdoms of the world". If the earth is round, he wouldn't be able to do so.

Even if the world is flat, any ordinary person wouldn't be able to do so!

Ummmm... that doesn't necessarily help your case at all. After all, the bible is specific that Jebus is "showed" the kingdoms of the world. If things are too far away to actually see, then the bible is lying when Jebus was "shown".

Either supernatural, or figure of speech...

Ummm... figure of speech?

Time and time again you have attempted to claim the bible should be taken literally, and now you're suggesting that something in it could be a "figure of speech"? That's quite... inconsistent.

Why are you assuming that the whole "can see everything" from one point on earth is a figure of speech not to be taken literally, but stories about creation/the flood/etc. must be taken literally? Don't see anything in the bible that says "Ok, this is just an allegory now... but take the rest of the bible literally".

...looking as far as the eyes can see and seeing splendor of the vista around you which could include skyline of surrounding kingdoms.

Except that you would be unable to see the skyline of kingdoms that were, for example, in the Americas.

FACT: Incalculable Numbers of Stars

Except we can calculate the number of stars.

300 Sextillion.

DONE THAT!

Genesis 22:15-17

15 The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time 16 and said, “I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky

Actually, that doesn't exactly help your case any.

In all of human existence there have been approximately 100-115 billion humans. (And this is assuming evolution is correct! If you believe creationism there would have been fewer.) Even if every one of these is a "descendant of abraham" (actually only a tiny fraction would be...) the lord has only gave Abraham 0.0000000000033% of the descendents that he promised (assuming he promised him as many descendants as "stars in the sky"). And if you look at the percentage of the population that's actually Jewish, you're talking 0.000000000000067%.

Even if you consider future generations, there will not be enough time to have "300 sextillion" descendents of Abraham before the sun goes red-giant and wipes out everyone on earth.

Why exactly is that "proof" of anything? I'm sure sailors have had to navigate around islands in the ocean for millenium. Knowing that the sea floor is varied would be something that would be considered common knowledge.

Check out your science. We're talking mountains and trenches UNDER the ocean!

How would've sailors navigate that???? How could've they even suspected, what more determined that there are mountain ranges and deep trenches and valley in the depths of the ocean! You're trying hard.

Ummm... you do realize that boats have these inventions called anchors, don't you?

Do you really think a sailor would be too dumb to notice "Hey, if I drop my anchor here it hits the ocean bottom, but if I drop it over there it doesn't. Maybe its because the ocean floor isn't flat!"

Yeah, I know. But then, people like Betsy are pretty simple-minded, and their arguments are easy to debunk.

Not that I'd ever expect to convince her of anything; I think she's too far gone. However, there may be people who do have the capability of rational thought who may not have seen her arguments before and might be fooled. That's why I sometimes answer her posts.

The most annoying thing though... pretty much all she can do is cut-and-paste. I sincerely doubt she has the ability to even put together her own thoughts. All she can do is parrot what she sees others post.

Here is when you know they realize they're losing their argument. They start with the insults and the name-calling!

Well, first of all that doesn't mean much, coming from you, considering the amount of name calling you've engaged in. Something about "living in glass houses and throwing stones" seems appropriate.

And here's a thought... if you don't want to be seen as a mindless "cut and paste" bot incapable of actually thinking, then perhaps you should stop making the majority of your posts to be mindless cut and paste jobs. Seriously, why exactly should we respect your intellect when you knowingly steal the majority of the stuff you post?

[segnosaur]

Ganja is marijuana. You know, smoking it mellows you out? You still haven't answered my question. Why was God so mean and bloodthirsty in the OT, but all kindness in the NT?

Well, technically he's not "all kindness" in the new testament.

For example, in Luke 10, Jebus tells people that if they're not treated well in a city they visit, it "shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom, than for that city.". Given the fact that Sodom was, you know, destroyed its not exactly a "friendly warning". Jebus doesn't mess around.

And don't forget all the fun in Revelations... "I will kill her children with death" (nice Jebus, really nice...). "a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer." (hmmm... wonder how a horse would do against an Abrahma M1A1 tank?)

[betsy]

We know there was not a world flood, especially one that covered the mountain tops as stated in Genesis 6.

I did not post about Noah's flood simply because science is still debating on that.

The point is you can't cherry pick true claims and ignore the vast quantities of bullshit.

So at least you admit that the ones I've picked to be posted so far are true claims!

As you can see, the ones I'm posting are ones that have been scientifically proven true - since atheists and skeptics will surely not accept just any statements based on faith alone.

It's the facts that are being presented here that's supposed to be debunked, discussed and analyzed! Bringing in faith-based events (that are not yet supported by science) as your way to dismiss the actual claims that are proven true is a way of....copping out.

For an ancient Book to have as many factual claims is a staggering evidence that Whoever gave the information to the authors of these factual claims indeed have intimate knowledge of details only a Creator a.k.a Intelligent Deisgner would and could know. And that points to the Judeo-Christian God!

Of course fundamentalist atheists - as expected - would resist that at all cost, because that blows up your belief of no God.

[betsy]

Ganja is marijuana. You know, smoking it mellows you out? You still haven't answered my question. Why was God so mean and bloodthirsty in the OT, but all kindness in the NT?

Numerous times, the coming of the Redeemer (Jesus Christ) was declared by God and prophecised in the Old Testament. So from the Old Testament God had already planned for our redemption.

Not only that, God already knew then too what sacrifices Jesus will go through for our redemption, some of the details of His tortures, scourgings and death were also prophecised.

To me, that shows a kind and loving God.

As for his "bloodthirstiness" and being so "mean," I hope you don't expect me to know all the answers to that. All I can say - from the way I, personally, understand it - God is the Creator of everything. He can do anything He wants with His creation. He can even make them extinct.

Trying to understand Him is no use....after all He did say:

"My ways are not your ways. My thoughts are not your thoughts."

Here is the Bible passage:

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD. "As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater, so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it. (Isaiah 55:8-11)

Edited May 26, 2011 by betsy

[scouterjim]

Numerous times, the coming of the Redeemer (Jesus Christ) was declared by God and prophecised in the Old Testament. So from the Old Testament God had already planned for our redemption.

Not only that, God already knew then too what sacrifices Jesus will go through for our redemption, some of the details of His tortures, scourgings and death were also prophecised.

To me, that shows a kind and loving God.

As for his "bloodthirstiness" and being so "mean," I hope you don't expect me to know all the answers to that. All I can say - from the way I, personally, understand it - God is the Creator of everything. He can do anything He wants with His creation. He can even make them extinct.

Trying to understand Him is no use....after all He did say:

"My ways are not your ways. My thoughts are not your thoughts."

Sounds like a Vulcan mind probe.

[betsy]

The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." (Psalms 14:1)

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? (Isaiah 40:26)

The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. (Psalms 19:1-3)

Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: "'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them. (Matthew 13:13-15)

What may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:19-22)

Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile." (1 Corinthians 3:18-20)

[scouterjim]

The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." (Psalms 14:1)

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? (Isaiah 40:26)

The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. (Psalms 19:1-3)

Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: "'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them. (Matthew 13:13-15)

What may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:19-22)

Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a "fool" so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile." (1 Corinthians 3:18-20)

Anybody who lives their life worshipping an unseen, unheard deity needs help BADLY.

[guyser]

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen,

Geebus, make up yer fricking mind will ya?

Id put more faith in Kreskin .

Edited May 26, 2011 by guyser

[betsy]

Actually I'm not accepting or rejecting any interpretation.

The point is... once you have a book where you have to do any interpretation, then that book is no longer "indisputable", as it now based in part on the ideals of the interpreter rather than the author.

Why is it "indisputable" if it's interpreted out of context? Not all are stupid to not see where one makes an error or one makes a more logical interpretation.

Ummm.... so? I never used Acts 15 when I was pointing out contradictions in gods law!!!!.

It's part of the explanation of the subject being discussed - Mosaic Law!

What you're doing is presenting a red herring!

No. I am trying to show consistency and credibility to what I was trying to explain!

I did.That's how I found all those contradictions that you keep pretending aren't there. Things like differences in the order of creation in Genesis, differences in the way Judas died or who the paternal grandfather of Jebus was in the New testament.

But you missed the important Mosaic Law!

All these things you claim to be inconsistent....cite exact passages so I won't think you're just pulling things out thin air!

Earlier in Psalm 18 it specifically mentions "foundations" as the tangible base, associating them with the "hills". So obviously you're not dealing with "moral grounds" if you're talking about foundations for hills and earthquakes.

Foundations of the hills was mentioned right after earthquakes....so yes that was a different "foundation." That's the kind of foundation you meant.

But "foundations of the world" being shown was mentioned along with God's rebuke! So to me, that's about moral grounds. Anyway, that's how I interpreted it.

There is another version from a source to be posted after this.

Ummmm... that doesn't necessarily help your case at all. After all, the bible is specific that Jebus is "showed" the kingdoms of the world. If things are too far away to actually see, then the bible is lying when Jebus was "shown".

So indeed He was shown. Supernaturally.

Ummm... figure of speech?

If not supernatural, then what else?

Time and time again you have attempted to claim the bible should be taken literally, and now you're suggesting that something in it could be a "figure of speech"? That's quite... inconsistent.

Pardon me, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that everything in the Bible should be taken literally!

What I've said is that: we must not change or add any words in the Bible, since Christ had said so.

Big difference in meaning between the two.

Why are you assuming that the whole "can see everything" from one point on earth is a figure of speech not to be taken literally, but stories about creation/the flood/etc. must be taken literally? Don't see anything in the bible that says "Ok, this is just an allegory now... but take the rest of the bible literally".

Because you're declaring the earth is flat just by that statement, that's why!

Actually, that doesn't exactly help your case any.

In all of human existence there have been approximately 100-115 billion humans. (And this is assuming evolution is correct! If you believe creationism there would have been fewer.) Even if every one of these is a "descendant of abraham" (actually only a tiny fraction would be...) the lord has only gave Abraham 0.0000000000033% of the descendents that he promised (assuming he promised him as many descendants as "stars in the sky"). And if you look at the percentage of the population that's actually Jewish, you're talking 0.000000000000067%.

Even if you consider future generations, there will not be enough time to have "300 sextillion" descendents of Abraham before the sun goes red-giant and wipes out everyone on earth.

Actually when I read your argument about the Mountains and the trenches....that really mess up all your cases!

Ummm... you do realize that boats have these inventions called anchors, don't you?

Do you really think a sailor would be too dumb to notice "Hey, if I drop my anchor here it hits the ocean bottom, but if I drop it over there it doesn't. Maybe its because the ocean floor isn't flat!"

And I couldn't believe you're really serious about that!

Well, first of all that doesn't mean much, coming from you, considering the amount of name calling you've engaged in. Something about "living in glass houses and throwing stones" seems appropriate.

As far as I can remember, only when I was sorely provoked. Did I call you any names here ?

And here's a thought... if you don't want to be seen as a mindless "cut and paste" bot incapable of actually thinking, then perhaps you should stop making the majority of your posts to be mindless cut and paste jobs. Seriously, why exactly should we respect your intellect when you knowingly steal the majority of the stuff you post?

I've given cut and paste where appropriate - some are self-explanatory that they don't need any redundant explanations.

If you don't like my style....hey, no one's twisting your arms to come in my thread.

Furthermore, in my long replies to you....I've also inserted my own views...which apparently you have failed to notice or not bothered to read, or....being dishonest about.

You guys really hate my sources. Must mean I've got excellent sources....since the opponents want them gone! Meaning: my sources are credible. Hard to rebutt.

As for having sources to back your claims up....read the forum guidelines. They actually encourage that for effective discourse! I identified and gave proper credits to my source(s)....so nothing was stolen.

Segnasaur, I am in this forum hoping for some mature and honest discussion....not some drag-down insult-fest brawl which demeans not only us, but also the board. You (and a few names) seem to be bent on this kind of interaction. I don't intend to be part of it.

Bye.

Edited May 26, 2011 by betsy

[DogOnPorch]

The one true faith.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60M5wjiQ5zU

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

[betsy]

This might interest some of you out there. Another interpretation on the foundations of the world.

DOES THE BIBLE TEACH A FLAT EARTH?

Gerardus D. Bouw, Ph.D.

Most modern scholars claim that the Bible teaches an earth, flat and rectangular in shape, which is placed on several pillars which, in turn, are based on a foundation. This, scholars claim, is how the ancients thought of the earth and man, in writing the Bible, merely echoed the scientific dogmas of the time. Because of that, many have assumed that the Bible was written by men and not by God and, as a result, that the Bible is not to be viewed as an authority in science. But a careful investigation and search of the Scriptures reveals that such a model is not dictated by the wording of the Bible. On the contrary, the Bible was already hinting of the sphericity of the earth by referring to the "compass upon the face of the depth" (Proverbs 8:27) some 500 years before the nations first started to doubt the flatness of the earth. The Biblical model is one which has an earth, basically spherical in shape, with angular continents, and pillars which undergird the world. The pillars can be shown to correspond to crystalline rock, commonly called the mantle, and that there is an unspecified number of foundations to the earth which can range from the roots of mountains to the core of the earth to the very foundation, Jesus Christ himself. That this is the Biblical perspective is the purpose behind this paper.

The Foundations of Earth and World

The Bible speaks of both the world and the earth as having foundations. The term, "world," speaks of the order of man in the earth. As such, references to foundations and pillars of the world cannot be held as very authoritative when it comes to speaking about the shape of the earth. The term "earth," on the other hand, can not only refer to the whole earth, but also to "ground" and, as we shall see, "land" or "country." So it is that a complete picture of the form of the earth in Scripture will not be manifest until all these are considered.

More.....http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_of_bible/flatearth/doesbibleteach.html

[DogOnPorch]

So all the Hindus...Hell bound?

[bloodyminded]

I did not post about Noah's flood simply because science is still debating on that.

No.

There are millions of species of animals. Millions.

"We need a bigger boat!"

Also, of course, most of these would not be available in that region. How long did it take the platypus and those bad-ass Amazonian centipedes to travel that far?

Edited May 27, 2011 by bloodyminded

[bloodyminded]

So all the Hindus...Hell bound?

And then some. More than two-thirds of humanity.

See you there, DoP. The beer's warm, but I'm buying.

[Saipan]

Counting the extra wooden beam at the front of the ship is kind of like claiming that a creationist is 7 feet tall because they're wearing a 2 foot tall dunce cap.

Of course. That's why I didn't nitpick and only copy and pasted info from the net.

[Saipan]

betsy, on 26 May 2011 - 03:26 AM, said:

Jesus' explanation on that: you already commit adultery if you entertain wet dreams about the other person's spouse!

Lo and behold, we all go to hell then. 'Specially the priests

[Sir Bandelot]

And then some. More than two-thirds of humanity.

See you there, DoP. The beer's warm, but I'm buying.

You must mean, Ireland

[Sir Bandelot]

Lo and behold, we all go to hell then. 'Specially the priests

We won't go to hell, if we understand that we're all human and will always make mistakes. The road to hell is, not realizing that you are imperfect, not trying to know yourself, and not being critical and improving yourself. And how can we come to know ourselves, to improve ourselves? What does that word even mean, 'improve'. Some find that answer, in the moral codes outlined in a book. Others through meditating while sitting under a tree. Still others, through every breath they take in daily life. But no matter what your path is, or how long you're on it you have to realize, mistakes will come again.

[bloodyminded]

You must mean, Ireland

Six of one.....

[Saipan]

Others through meditating while sitting under a tree.

Always nice. As long as it's not coconuts up there.

[scouterjim]

Always nice. As long as it's not coconuts up there.

...or monkeys.

[betsy]

Probing Genesis for scientific truth

Andrew Parker is a respected evolutionary biologist, a professor at the Natural History Museum in London and a honorary fellow at Oxford University. In his previous book, "In the Blink of an Eye: How Vision Sparked the Big Bang of Evolution," he argued that the development of sight was pivotal in creating the earth's variety of species.

In his latest book, "The Genesis Enigma: Why the Bible Is Scientifically Accurate," published in October by Dutton, Parker wades into controversial waters. He examines the first book of Genesis for signs of scientific truth. His conclusion offers a new way of viewing the dilemma of science vs. religion.

I recently volunteered to place the creation account of Genesis 1 side-by-side with our new scientific understanding of the history of life and the universe. Excepting the absurd fiction that the world was created in seven days, I found an eerily-close match. Amazingly, the precise wording of the Bible's first page, and the events inferred and the sequence with which they are placed, tells the story of life's history according to our current best scientific understanding. That a man without scientific knowledge , should write such a thing in 700 BCE is almost scary. And then another man of similar stock placed it on the first page of his people's most important book. This is what I call a genesis enigma.

On the Bible's first page 'Let there be light' is mentioned twice, why? Recently science has provided answers in both physics and biology -- the formation of the sun followed by the introduction of vision -- and I played some scientific role in the second.

In Genesis 1, emphasis is placed on sea creatures, despite this biblical author being landlocked with little or no knowledge of marine life. Who in their right mind would have placed these center stage? The more I looked, the more the Genesis creation story seemed unlikely to be the result of a lucky guess. That got me thinking a few winters ago.

Are those words really sacred, in some way? As a scientist not in the habit of contemplating the divine, I was later surprised to discover within religion some good old rationality.

Although science is sound, does it have its limits beyond which we enter a realm that does not conform to mathematical formulae? Science cannot tell us whether something inexplicable -- God -- exists or not. Atheists' claims cannot be substantiated -- indeed, they are unscientific because atheism becomes as much a faith (in no God) as religion is itself. It carries a bias, and science does not. Actually, science and religion can co-exist peacefully. Einstein thought so.

More...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/shortstack/2009/11/probing_genesis_for_scientific.html

I should point out that Andrew Parker - despite his findings about Genesis - rejects Creationism and Intelligent Design. This blog was posted for the sole reason that Mr Parker himself had stated the scientific accuracy of Genesis.

Edited May 28, 2011 by betsy

[DogOnPorch]

So...in your view...are all Hindus going to Hell?

[betsy]

So...in your view...are all Hindus going to Hell?

It is written in the Bible how we may find salvation. Christians are supposed to spread the good news for if we're supposed to love our fellowmen, surely we'd want for them to be saved.

My personal view doesn't matter at all. In the end, God is the only one who can judge.

Edited May 28, 2011 by betsy