On Deuteronomy 22

[trevorw2539]

Jul 25, 2012 17:58:32 GMT -5 cranberry49 said:

Jul 25, 2012 17:43:58 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

Please read the passages from the Bible you quote, and think carefully about what you have said.

I have read them. But, this is in no way stating that either one of these people have had several lives. No where does it insinuate that each person has ever been any other person than the one mentioned. Am I understanding what you are implying correctly? If not, please explain.

The passages I refer to are the ones about recognition.
Saul did not 'recognise' Samuel. He knew it was him by the description 'an old man in a cloak'.
As you say 'David assumed' he would recognise his son. Actually all David said was that his son could not come back from the dead, but that he would himself would die - go to him.
Abraham, Lazarus etc was a 'parable'.
Moses and Elijah. How could the two disciples recognise either. They had both been dead for many centuries, and there were no Photos of pictures of them. The only way they could have 'known' would have been through the fact that Moses and Elijah were two prominent 'heroes' of the Jews, or it was revealed to them.

According to Scripture we will have new bodies. I hope mine's better than the old one I have now.

Good to talk, but it's long past my bedtime. Will catch up tomorrow.

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2012 18:14:58 GMT -5 happyhippy said:

Hi happyhippy, no - I was on MSN under the same moniker.

Ahh yes ,I realize now,the one and same I.S.A., (took me a while to get it) I used to read those very intriguing posts there.
Cheers!

Ok, and who, if I might be so bold to ask, were you on MSN?

[cranberry49]

Jul 25, 2012 18:15:38 GMT -5 @devianity said:

Jul 25, 2012 18:09:06 GMT -5 cranberry49 said:

Are you talking about this? I don't understand what you are asking! Maybe I'm having a dumb(er) moment?!

Oh, my apologies

I was wondering, initially, how one reconciles the apparently contradictory notions.

You told me, I think, that it appears to be contradictory only to those who haven't studied/contemplated the Bible to a sufficient degree.

I said presumably you have studied the Bible to a sufficient degree (in order to know that) and so I was hoping for an explanation.

No problem. I think we are straight now, yes?

[moxie]

[happyhippy]

Ok, and who, if I might be so bold to ask, were you on MSN?

I was called Potatohead lol, Although I was on another thread I'd read the posts on your topical thread, because of similar interests I had, at the time. The only one I thought quite wacko was that teabag fellow. Charles was almost as wacko too .lol

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2012 18:26:14 GMT -5 cranberry49 said:

Jul 25, 2012 18:15:38 GMT -5 @devianity said:

Oh, my apologies

I was wondering, initially, how one reconciles the apparently contradictory notions.

You told me, I think, that it appears to be contradictory only to those who haven't studied/contemplated the Bible to a sufficient degree.

I said presumably you have studied the Bible to a sufficient degree (in order to know that) and so I was hoping for an explanation.

No problem. I think we are straight now, yes?

Well, we are still minus an explanation from you but I have given up hope of getting one, so yes -all straight now. Much obliged.

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2012 18:28:49 GMT -5 happyhippy said:

Ok, and who, if I might be so bold to ask, were you on MSN?

I was called Potatohead lol, Although I was on another thread I'd read the posts on your topical thread, because of similar interests I had, at the time. The only one I thought quite wacko was that teabag fellow. Charles was almost as wacko too .lol

Hmm... long time ago now. I don't remember a teabag fellow but I do recall a Charles (Darwin) aka 'Tosh'.

Potatohead ;D good one.

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2012 17:23:36 GMT -5 cranberry49 said:

Jul 25, 2012 17:20:46 GMT -5 @devianity said:

Well, you made two statements.

In one: 'All people are treated the same by God'.

In the other: 'God will provide, but He will not provide for the lawless ones'.

This suggests, to me, that He doesn't treat the lawless ones the same as the lawful ones… ergo… all people are NOT treated the same by God… ergo… there is a contradiction afoot, no?

You are right. I retract that statement. All people have the chance to be treated the same. Equally. I was wrong in my statement. Thanks for pointing that out!

God loves everyone and is "no respecter of persons". But, God also requires that we love, obey and follow him. If you do so , then you receive God's blessings, if not, then you will not.

[happyhippy]

Hmm... long time ago now. I don't remember a teabag fellow but I do recall a Charles (Darwin) aka 'Tosh'.

Potatohead ;D good one.

Lol Oh yes Tosh, Yes I dont think anyone remembers the teabag fellow thank heavens (pun intended.) He came out with the most utter tripe.

Well its good to meet you ISA (et al)

Apologies all, for the interruption.

Goodnight.

[Deleted]

Likewise, happyhippy, goodnight.

[moxie]

Hmm... long time ago now. I don't remember a teabag fellow but I do recall a Charles (Darwin) aka 'Tosh'.

[Virgil Showlion]

I was wondering, initially, how one reconciles the apparently contradictory notions.

You told me, I think, that it appears to be contradictory only to those who haven't studied/contemplated the Bible to a sufficient degree.

I thought it pertinent to add an extension of Cranberry's thoughts in #138:

Although you're right that most biblical "contradictions" are nothing more than the laziness or casual ignorance of the reader, I find they're also a tremendous tool in identifying and proving correct interpretations. Or more specifically, for debunking incorrect interpretations.

The bible is mathematically beautiful in the sense that there can be no contradictions, in the same way that a mathematical theorem that contradicts any established and rigorously-proven axioms is known to be in error "somewhere".

Consider, for example, the issue of "was Christ actually born on Christmas (December 25th)"? We can look to the pagan origins of Christmas (i.e. the pagan festival of Saturnalia, the "birth of the sun" at the winter solstice, etc.), but to rigorously prove that Christ was not born in December requires nothing more than a detailed (and somewhat mathematical) analysis of scripture, combined with our "no contradictions" axiom as a powerful deductive tool.

Another example would be "was Christ crucified on the Passover?". Here is a case where (the Catholics', for example) answer to the question ("no") can be definitively debunked with scripture, thoughtful analysis, and our powerful axiom. (A positive proof that Christ was crucified on the Passover can also be constructed solely from the Bible, but it doesn't make use of our axiom.)

A third example is disproving the so-called trinity—the doctrine of the closed Godhead. Trinitarian doctrine is nowhere in the Bible. The term "trinity" doesn't even appear in Christian literature until Tertullian (c. 150–225 AD).

In short, not all "contradictions" arise due to simple factors. When 1 and 1 don't add up to 2, the issue might be anything ranging from simple contextual ignorance to a fundamental flaw in the way you're looking at a particular scripture or set of scriptures.

For your consideration, to encourage you to hold fast to scripture—every word that proceeds from the mouth of God—I leave you with just a small taste of what happens when you don't.

"The Christianity of the New Testament simply does not exist. Millions of people through the centuries have little by little cheated God out of Christianity, and have succeeded in making Christianity exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament" (pp. 32–33).
    - Sören Kierkegaard, Attack Upon Christendom

"Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated life in the theology and liturgy of the church; the Greek language, having reigned for centuries over philosophy, became the vehicle of Christian literature and ritual; the Greek mysteries passed down into the impressive mystery of the Mass. Other pagan cultures contributed to the syncretist result. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity… and a personal immortality of reward and punishment; from Egypt the adoration of the Mother and Child, and the mystic theosophy that made Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, and obscured the Christian creed; there, too, Christian monasticism would find its exemplars and its source. From Phrygia came the worship of the Great Mother; from Syria the resurrection drama of Adonis; from Thrace, perhaps, the cult of Dionysus, the dying and saving god.… The Mithraic ritual so closely resembled the eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass that Christian fathers charged the Devil with inventing these similarities to mislead frail minds. Christianity was the last creation of the ancient pagan world… [The Eucharist] was the conception long sanctified by time; the pagan mind needed no schooling to receive it; by embodying the 'mystery of the Mass,' Christianity became the last and greatest of the mystery religions." (pp. 595, 599).
    - Will Durant, The Story of Civilization

(I should disclaim that the 'Mass' and the 'Eucharist' Mr. Durant is talking about here isn't 'an assembly of people' and 'the bread and wine taken at Passover in remembrance of Christ's sacrifice', but rather the huge set of rituals and dogma that built up around "the Mass" (capitalized) and "the Eucharist" (capitalized), none of which appears in the Bible.)

[cranberry49]

Jul 25, 2012 18:18:57 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

Jul 25, 2012 17:58:32 GMT -5 cranberry49 said:

I have read them. But, this is in no way stating that either one of these people have had several lives. No where does it insinuate that each person has ever been any other person than the one mentioned. Am I understanding what you are implying correctly? If not, please explain.

The passages I refer to are the ones about recognition.
Saul did not 'recognise' Samuel. He knew it was him by the description 'an old man in a cloak'.
As you say 'David assumed' he would recognise his son. Actually all David said was that his son could not come back from the dead, but that he would himself would die - go to him.
Abraham, Lazarus etc was a 'parable'.
Moses and Elijah. How could the two disciples recognise either. They had both been dead for many centuries, and there were no Photos of pictures of them. The only way they could have 'known' would have been through the fact that Moses and Elijah were two prominent 'heroes' of the Jews, or it was revealed to them.

According to Scripture we will have new bodies. I hope mine's better than the old one I have now.

Good to talk, but it's long past my bedtime. Will catch up tomorrow.

Ok. Maybe that was a bad example that I posted. I am trying to find a certain scripture that seems to allude me. I know they are parables, yet I haven't a clue as to how to explain what I'm thinking! Sorry....

According to Scripture we will have new bodies. I hope mine's better than the old one I have now.

LOL! Well, we are told that we will. I'm with you on this, BTW..Nice to meet you!

[cranberry49]

Jul 25, 2012 19:02:15 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I was wondering, initially, how one reconciles the apparently contradictory notions.

You told me, I think, that it appears to be contradictory only to those who haven't studied/contemplated the Bible to a sufficient degree.

I thought it pertinent to add an extension of Cranberry's thoughts in #138:

Although you're right that most biblical "contradictions" are nothing more than the laziness or casual ignorance of the reader, I find they're also a tremendous tool in identifying and proving correct interpretations. Or more specifically, for debunking incorrect interpretations.

The bible is mathematically beautiful in the sense that there can be no contradictions, in the same way that a mathematical theorem that contradicts any established and rigorously-proven axioms is known to be in error "somewhere".

Consider, for example, the issue of "was Christ actually born on Christmas (December 25th)"? We can look to the pagan origins of Christmas (i.e. the pagan festival of Saturnalia, the "birth of the sun" at the winter solstice, etc.), but to rigorously prove that Christ was not born in December requires nothing more than a detailed (and somewhat mathematical) analysis of scripture, combined with our "no contradictions" axiom as a powerful deductive tool.

Another example would be "was Christ crucified on the Passover?". Here is a case where (the Catholics', for example) answer to the question ("no") can be definitively debunked with scripture, thoughtful analysis, and our powerful axiom. (A positive proof that Christ was crucified on the Passover can also be constructed solely from the Bible, but it doesn't make use of our axiom.)

A third example is disproving the so-called trinity—the doctrine of the closed Godhead. Trinitarian doctrine is nowhere in the Bible. The term "trinity" doesn't even appear in Christian literature until Tertullian (c. 150–225 AD).

In short, not all "contradictions" arise due to simple factors. When 1 and 1 don't add up to 2, the issue might be anything ranging from simple contextual ignorance to a fundamental flaw in the way you're looking at a particular scripture or set of scriptures.

For your consideration, to encourage you to hold fast to scripture—every word that proceeds from the mouth of God—I leave you with just a small taste of what happens when you don't.

"The Christianity of the New Testament simply does not exist. Millions of people through the centuries have little by little cheated God out of Christianity, and have succeeded in making Christianity exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament" (pp. 32–33).
    - Sören Kierkegaard, Attack Upon Christendom

"Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated life in the theology and liturgy of the church; the Greek language, having reigned for centuries over philosophy, became the vehicle of Christian literature and ritual; the Greek mysteries passed down into the impressive mystery of the Mass. Other pagan cultures contributed to the syncretist result. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity… and a personal immortality of reward and punishment; from Egypt the adoration of the Mother and Child, and the mystic theosophy that made Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, and obscured the Christian creed; there, too, Christian monasticism would find its exemplars and its source. From Phrygia came the worship of the Great Mother; from Syria the resurrection drama of Adonis; from Thrace, perhaps, the cult of Dionysus, the dying and saving god.… The Mithraic ritual so closely resembled the eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass that Christian fathers charged the Devil with inventing these similarities to mislead frail minds. Christianity was the last creation of the ancient pagan world… [The Eucharist] was the conception long sanctified by time; the pagan mind needed no schooling to receive it; by embodying the 'mystery of the Mass,' Christianity became the last and greatest of the mystery religions." (pp. 595, 599).
    - Will Durant, The Story of Civilization

(I should disclaim that the 'Mass' and the 'Eucharist' Mr. Durant is talking about here isn't 'an assembly of people' and 'the bread and wine taken at Passover in remembrance of Christ's sacrifice', but rather the huge set of rituals and dogma that built up around "the Mass" (capitalized) and "the Eucharist" (capitalized), none of which appears in the Bible.)

Absolutely brilliant! Thanks a bunch for that!

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

Ahamburger. For all your quotes from Wiki you still have not proved that God wrote either the Bible or the Quran. Both beliefs are by faith.
Perhaps you could send the drinks to me.

[/size]

LOL, touché Trevor, just that they all have the same original profits, believe in the same bloodlines and are all talking about the same god. Interestingly enough this movement started very small was persecuted badly, and has grown larger and larger over time. Almost like how the Universe started at a single point and continues to expand. Maybe Virg owes us both a drink? ;D

Yes, Ham. I know that's what they claim.

But despite what anyone says, Christians and Muslims can't both be possessors of the truth, and I've seen the fruits of Islamic doctrine on the issues where it departs from the Old Testament and Christ's teachings. I admit that reading the Koran from cover to cover is still on my to-do list.

Some of my more learned and worldly colleagues have studied it in detail, and they've commented that Islam is no different from Christianity in one principle regard: 99% of people who claim to be Muslims don't adhere to the tenets and doctrines of Koran, and many 'versions' of Islam (consider Sufi Islam, for example) are so disparate from it that one wonders why they bother to call themselves "Muslim". It would appear the "believe whatever you want; it's all good" malaise of western Christianity is not confined to western Christianity.

[/size]

Come on Virg, you're an engineer, you know all about collaboration. It's possible for two or three to come together for the right answers, it happens all the time.. I agree with your colleagues, it's supposed to be Peace be with you, right? However, Moe wrote the Koran because the Byzantine Empire brought God, Abraham, and JC into the desert with a new Sabbath and commandments. This brought on the Islamic Caliphate, so the Justice they seek is for JC and God.

Why not?

Is it not possible that God gave people multiple versions of his religion, knowing that different peoples would not all gravitate towards the same version. So he gave people options on which version to go with, but ultimately they all lead to him?

[/size]

That's exactly it Arch as far as I am concerned. Something to consider, perhaps its not God that got confused, it was the primates that received the gifts we have that got confused.. ;D



Oh some interesting reading concerning all of this..

We found Jesus through Allah, say Christian converts
www.mohabatnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5016:we-found-jesus-through-allah-say-christian-converts&catid=36:iranian-christians&Itemid=279

[trevorw2539]

Jul 25, 2012 19:02:15 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I was wondering, initially, how one reconciles the apparently contradictory notions.

You told me, I think, that it appears to be contradictory only to those who haven't studied/contemplated the Bible to a sufficient degree.

I thought it pertinent to add an extension of Cranberry's thoughts in #138:

Although you're right that most biblical "contradictions" are nothing more than the laziness or casual ignorance of the reader, I find they're also a tremendous tool in identifying and proving correct interpretations. Or more specifically, for debunking incorrect interpretations.

The bible is mathematically beautiful in the sense that there can be no contradictions, in the same way that a mathematical theorem that contradicts any established and rigorously-proven axioms is known to be in error "somewhere".

Consider, for example, the issue of "was Christ actually born on Christmas (December 25th)"? We can look to the pagan origins of Christmas (i.e. the pagan festival of Saturnalia, the "birth of the sun" at the winter solstice, etc.), but to rigorously prove that Christ was not born in December requires nothing more than a detailed (and somewhat mathematical) analysis of scripture, combined with our "no contradictions" axiom as a powerful deductive tool.

Another example would be "was Christ crucified on the Passover?". Here is a case where (the Catholics', for example) answer to the question ("no") can be definitively debunked with scripture, thoughtful analysis, and our powerful axiom. (A positive proof that Christ was crucified on the Passover can also be constructed solely from the Bible, but it doesn't make use of our axiom.)

A third example is disproving the so-called trinity—the doctrine of the closed Godhead. Trinitarian doctrine is nowhere in the Bible. The term "trinity" doesn't even appear in Christian literature until Tertullian (c. 150–225 AD).

In short, not all "contradictions" arise due to simple factors. When 1 and 1 don't add up to 2, the issue might be anything ranging from simple contextual ignorance to a fundamental flaw in the way you're looking at a particular scripture or set of scriptures.

For your consideration, to encourage you to hold fast to scripture—every word that proceeds from the mouth of God—I leave you with just a small taste of what happens when you don't.

"The Christianity of the New Testament simply does not exist. Millions of people through the centuries have little by little cheated God out of Christianity, and have succeeded in making Christianity exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament" (pp. 32–33).
    - Sören Kierkegaard, Attack Upon Christendom

"Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it. The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated life in the theology and liturgy of the church; the Greek language, having reigned for centuries over philosophy, became the vehicle of Christian literature and ritual; the Greek mysteries passed down into the impressive mystery of the Mass. Other pagan cultures contributed to the syncretist result. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity… and a personal immortality of reward and punishment; from Egypt the adoration of the Mother and Child, and the mystic theosophy that made Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, and obscured the Christian creed; there, too, Christian monasticism would find its exemplars and its source. From Phrygia came the worship of the Great Mother; from Syria the resurrection drama of Adonis; from Thrace, perhaps, the cult of Dionysus, the dying and saving god.… The Mithraic ritual so closely resembled the eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass that Christian fathers charged the Devil with inventing these similarities to mislead frail minds. Christianity was the last creation of the ancient pagan world… [The Eucharist] was the conception long sanctified by time; the pagan mind needed no schooling to receive it; by embodying the 'mystery of the Mass,' Christianity became the last and greatest of the mystery religions." (pp. 595, 599).
    - Will Durant, The Story of Civilization

(I should disclaim that the 'Mass' and the 'Eucharist' Mr. Durant is talking about here isn't 'an assembly of people' and 'the bread and wine taken at Passover in remembrance of Christ's sacrifice', but rather the huge set of rituals and dogma that built up around "the Mass" (capitalized) and "the Eucharist" (capitalized), none of which appears in the Bible.)

for shortness
1. Christmas day cannot be a contradiction in the Bible. It has nothing to do with the Bible.
3. Ditto
2. (A positive proof that Christ was crucified on the Passover can also be constructed solely from the Bible, but it doesn't make use of our axiom.)
??
Mark 14:1-2. Matth. 26:4-5. 'Not on the feast day....'.
Mark 14:12. Matth 26:17. Luke 24:7 all claim that they prepared the Passover on the first day of unleavened bread. The feast of unleavened bread started at dusk, at the end of the Passover day. Remember that Jewish days start at dusk one day and end at dusk the next.
In short Christ was crucified on the day the Passover lamb was sacrificed - in the 24 hours before Passover day.
One problem we have is that Passover and Unleavened Bread was probably, as now, classed as one 8 day celebration. Originally they were two.
I think the writers of the Gospels many decades later, whoever they were, were relying on sources which had things slightly wrong.

dusk Wednesday-dusk Thurs.... Passover preparation day.
dusk Thurs-dusk Fri Passover.... ********** see below
dusk Fri-dusk Sat ....Sabbath ********** see below
dusk Sat-dusk Sun .... Feast of First Fruits or Wave Sheaf Offering (Lev. 23:10-14)

************ these two days were feast days so the women could not go to the tomb to anoint Jesus' body on them.

Anyway that's my reading of things.

[trevorw2539]

"The Christianity of the New Testament simply does not exist. Millions of people through the centuries have little by little cheated God out of Christianity, and have succeeded in making Christianity exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament" (pp. 32–33).
- Sören Kierkegaard, Attack Upon Christendom

Agree to a great extent.

[weltschmerz]

LOL, touché Trevor, just that they all have the same original profits
------------
Oh, they have profits, all right. The Pope is one of the richest men on earth.

[Reckless Roselia]

Jul 25, 2012 15:13:54 GMT -5 cranberry49 said:

Jul 25, 2012 12:00:18 GMT -5 Reckless Roselia said:

What about a God of contradiction?

Contrary to popular belief, the bible does NOT contradict itself.

Heres one authors thoughts:

www.equip.org/perspectives/bible-contradictions-does-the-bible-contradict-itself/

Bible Contradictions: Does the Bible Contradict Itself?


Well, if you’re like most people, I’m sure you’ve heard someone say “The Bible is full of contradictions.” Well, is this true? Does the Bible contradict itself?

Does the Bible Contradict Itself- A definition

Speaking of contradictions, let me begin by saying that two statements are said to contradict if the truth of one of the statements negates the truth of the other. Take for example the statements, “I have read the Bible,” and “I have never read the Bible.” Obviously, if one statement is true the other statement would have to be false. Let’s apply this to the Bible. Only after you can demonstrate that the truth of one passage, rules out the truth of another passage, can you justify the claim that the Bible contradicts itself.

Does the Bible Contradict Itself- A Closer Look

You see, many passages which seem to be in conflict are easily resolved by simply reading the text more carefully. In addition, an understanding of Greek or Hebrew, as well as a knowledge of geography and customs would be extremely helpful. Take for example the account of Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus. In Acts 9:7 we read that during Paul’s encounter with Christ the men who were with him heard a voice. In Acts 22:9 we read that these men heard no voice. Well, what appears to be a hopeless contradiction is easily resolved by looking at the original Greek. Here we see a distinction between “hearing a sound as a noise” and “hearing a voice as a thought-conveying message.” Gleason Archer, an accomplished biblical scholar points out, that while Paul’s companions heard the Voice as a sound, Paul alone heard what was being said. (Kind of like the crowd who heard the sound of the Father talking to the Son in John 12:28, and thought they heard thunder.)

The point is that rather than taking a fearful attitude when faced with an alleged biblical contradiction, we should view these occasions as opportunities to search and explore the Scriptures. One thing I can guarantee is this: It will only serve to deepen your awe of the majesty of Scripture.

Does the Bible Contradict Itself- Conclusion

In fact, the more I personally read the Bible, the more I marvel at this awesome Book. How is it possible for forty different authors to write over a span of 1,600 years, on three continents, in three languages, on hundreds of subjects — yet, without contradiction — and with one central storyline, God’s redemption of mankind. Truly, it can be said without contradiction that the Bible must be divine, rather than human in origin.


If you will search, you find many more that explain what many consider to be contradictions.

I feel the author is touching upon 'contradistinction' rather than contradiction. It maybe wise seeing how other authors find contradictions too - from the Bible or other Holy sources.

[Virgil Showlion]

In short Christ was crucified on the day the Passover lamb was sacrificed - in the 24 hours before Passover day.

Indeed Trevor. I should have been clearer as to what I meant. The timing of Christ's sacrifice was in concert with the slaying of the Passover lamb, as he became our Passover.

I was alluding to the Catholic view that Christ was crucified on "Good Friday" and resurrected on "Easter Sunday", and the conniptions they go through trying to explain how Friday to Sunday is three days and three nights.

Christmas day cannot be a contradiction in the Bible. It has nothing to do with the Bible.

You can prove that Christ wasn't born on December 25th solely from Biblical sources, is my point.

[Reckless Roselia]

Quote:
Christmas day cannot be a contradiction in the Bible. It has nothing to do with the Bible.

You can prove that Christ wasn't born on December 25th solely from Biblical sources, is my point.

Christianity is tied in strongly with Astrology.

[Virgil Showlion]

Christianity is tied in strongly with Astrology.

Depending on what you mean by "Christianity" and "astrology", I suppose.

You'd have to show me specific verses where the Bible makes use of astrology. I can think of none. I know of several where the Bible specifically instructs Christians to avoid consulting mystics and mediums, and not to be dismayed at the signs of heaven.

As for various astrological concepts being "similar to" Christian ones, I'm not the least bit surprised. Astrology is such a generalized, nebulous body of theories with every imaginable symbol, construction, and method that it "is tied in strongly" with everything under the sun. It's one of the reasons people still ooh and ahh at horoscopes even today.

[trevorw2539]

You can prove that Christ wasn't born on December 25th solely from Biblical sources, is my point.

Only because December wasn't in the Jewish calendar Sorry, couldn't resist it.

[happyhippy]

At the end of the bible it says that those who add or take away (edit) the words of God shall be punished and it is indeed blasphemous. We have many versions and edited versions coming out.It is in itself going through an evolutionary process. I possess different versions of the bible and they in fact do vary.

If we are to believe in demons and possessions of the human body, can one exorcise out the demonic spirit even if the book is not original to its original texts? Could it be, that the less original to the scriptures the book becomes the less powerful and effective it is?

Can be quite worrying to some or there is something not quite right!

[trevorw2539]

Jul 26, 2012 13:27:53 GMT -5 happyhippy said:

At the end of the bible it says that those who add or take away (edit) the words of God shall be punished and it is indeed blasphemous. We have many versions and edited versions coming out.It is in itself going through an evolutionary process. I possess different versions of the bible and they in fact do vary.

If we are to believe in demons and possessions of the human body, can one exorcise out the demonic spirit even if the book is not original to its original texts? Could it be, that the less original to the scriptures the book becomes the less powerful and effective it is?




.

Can be quite worrying to some or there is something not quite right!

With respect it actually says 'If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add to him the plagues that are written in this book. If he take away from the words of the book of this prophecy........' Talking about, and from, the book of Revelation. (22:18-19)

NOW THERE IS a book which has been interpreted in many ways. Most agree that it is the 'end of time' scenario, but very few agree with the interpretation of the 'picture' images in the vision. A book I have never studied, simply because its interpretation is personal choice.

Islam has a similar thought about 'Armageddon', but with a different ending obviously.
Your other point is a good one. I don't think it is so much the Book itself, it is more the followers of the Book. People take more notice of the actions of those who proclaim to be followers of a religion, than the book behind it.

BTW Hi.

[happyhippy]

Thank you Trev, I did mean that, in a manner of speaking.

Further to the curiosity and IMO,There is of course the belief in Jesus that you can cast out demons, but is it really you the individual, that had that power in the first place? Perhaps this is the true message,not through Jesus but by his ways.

My point is, regardless of who you think you are doing wonders in the name of,- you are actually doing the casting out or healing all by yourself. Like the (controversial) great placebo effect that is influenced by the belief that ,what is focused on, will be corrected.

I believe there is a law of the universe in corrective balance. That is applied in ALL things.

[Deleted]

Jul 26, 2012 14:16:15 GMT -5 happyhippy said:

Thank you Trev, I did mean that, in a manner of speaking.

Further to the curiosity and IMO,There is of course the belief in Jesus that you can cast out demons, but is it really you the individual, that had that power in the first place? Perhaps this is the true message,not through Jesus but by his ways.

My point is, regardless of who you think you are doing wonders in the name of,- you are actually doing the casting out or healing all by yourself. Like the (controversial) great placebo effect that is influenced by the belief that ,what is focused on, will be corrected.

I believe there is a law of the universe in corrective balance. That is applied in ALL things.

[Virgil Showlion]

I possess different versions of the bible and they in fact do vary.

Certain versions have sentences added. Some have poor translations.

It's important to have a concordance handy (or a transliterated Bible version) to indicate what the original language says. Additionally, any Bible worth reading will have added words in italics.

One of the reasons the Dead Sea Scrolls were such a momentous discovery was because they proved how accurately Biblical texts have been preserved over the centuries. The reports by the first linguists to study the scrolls are entertaining to read. They couldn't believe that aside from some spelling changes (which are disclaimed to have no effect whatsoever on the meanings of the words), the most authoritative biblical texts of the 20th century were utterly identical to those from thousands of years earlier.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

That's exactly it Virg, Christianty is based on the Rabbi who was the Messiah life..

I hear ya Mrs. Weltz, the Catholic church is one the the larges land owners on Earth. It was all part of the plan.

Jul 26, 2012 11:21:39 GMT -5 trevorw2539 said:

"The Christianity of the New Testament simply does not exist. Millions of people through the centuries have little by little cheated God out of Christianity, and have succeeded in making Christianity exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament" (pp. 32–33).
- Sören Kierkegaard, Attack Upon Christendom

Agree to a great extent.

Interesting quote Trevor, I think Christianity did exactly what JC wanted it to do.

Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war.

For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

The Roman Army's Secret Christians - Decoding the Ancients
www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=117598

The film begins in a cave near Jericho where Christian symbols have been found, next to mysterious carvings of the Roman Legion. We then track down these symbols from Megiddo to Pompeii to Hadrian's Wall on the English/Scottish border to Dura Europa in Syria. What we discover is that the Roman army didn't oppress Christianity - it spread it!

, , and (Now all you have to do is look after yours. )

Investing: Basics & Beyond
notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=startinvesting

Your Money
notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=finance

Smart Spending
notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=smartspending

[cranberry49]

Jul 27, 2012 0:29:07 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I possess different versions of the bible and they in fact do vary.

Certain versions have sentences added. Some have poor translations.

It's important to have a concordance handy (or a transliterated Bible version) to indicate what the original language says. Additionally, any Bible worth reading will have added words in italics.

One of the reasons the Dead Sea Scrolls were such a momentous discovery was because they proved how accurately Biblical texts have been preserved over the centuries. The reports by the first linguists to study the scrolls are entertaining to read. They couldn't believe that aside from some spelling changes (which are disclaimed to have no effect whatsoever on the meanings of the words), the most authoritative biblical texts of the 20th century were utterly identical to those from thousands of years earlier.

Exactly! This is what I've been trying to tell others for years that claim that the bible has lost translation and changed over the centuries. You said it better than I ever could!