The Bible is True

One way mirror i see! How about refuting his view points with actual data!!!

... or are you trying to fill the space of Padawan #4?

Can't say I blame you to be honest, who wants to defend a lie
[quote/]

EVIDENCE!!!! NOT OPINION!!!! Youngling walk the walk or stick with your usual talk the talk!!!

[mutters under breath:- "Freakin Padawan!!!"]

If you want to be taken seriously, try backing that argument up with something more than just a lame opinion.
[quote/]

OMG!! LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND SAY THAT!!!. Diffence is the ones your talking too are actually providing evidence of their views, and yet your showing nothing but.... hmmm a Padawan 'OPINION!!!'.

OMG!

Really, do the MODS read this crap?

Murgatroid youngling,
Again, VERY nice job destroying your own credibility & keep up the good work...

M.Coomba

edit on 10-2-2019 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2019 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)

If you want to be taken seriously, try backing that argument up with something more than just a lame opinion.
[quote/]

'OPINION!!!'OMG!! LOOK IN THE MIRROR AND SAY THAT!!!. Diffence is the ones your talking too are actually providing evidence of their views, and yet your showing nothing but.... hmmm a Padawan 'OPINION!!!'.

OMG!

Really, do the MODS read this crap?

Murgatroid youngling,
Again, VERY nice job destroying your own credibility & keep up the good work...

M.Coomba

edit on 10-2-2019 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)

Strange there must be a Padawan quota now!!

2 Padawans per post. lol

Coomba98

a reply to: Murgatroid

Once again, you didn't offer a rebuttal or refutation to anything I said. Your credibility has never existed in the first place, you literally just copy paste the same ol' tireless youtube videos over and over and think you made a point. The gimmick is old.

Talk all the BS you want, let it all out about how evil science is some mega scam to hide god while never once even refuting a single piece of evidence supporting evolution. But you want ME to back things up?? Talk about double standards. I mean AT LEAST make an argument or specify what you want backed up. It's comical because you never back anything up. Your best argument is, "This religious apologist said so." The odds for biblical accuracy were made up on the spot by an intellectually dishonest apologist. You couldn't even defend it.

a reply to: MurgatroidWhat would your religious beliefs be if you were living a part of the world where your current religion isn’t predominant?

After death or martyrdom, Muslims do not have sex with 72 virgins....or maybe they do.
What makes one religion any better than the other?

What happened to souls before Jesus?
The letter “J” wasn’t invented until the mid 1500’s. Do the math,it was IMPOSSIBLE for his name to be Jesus,it may be possible for him to be named Yahweh or Ayesha, then why didn’t the bible write it that way?
I believe in an all-loving higher Source.

Why is god assumed to be a man? Why can’t god be a woman? Why can’t god be, the source without religious or gender connotations?It becomes blatantly obvious how naive people can be when they believe everything they read in the bible without questioning anything.

a reply to: madenusa

My religious beliefs have nothing to do with the current predominant religion...

The predominant religion among those where I grew up in LA was "heathen"...

And that is EXACTLY what I turned out to be BTW.

My military dogtags from age 20 still say "No religous beliefs" on them...

My "current predominant religion" is simply a direct result of a 'Damascus road' type supernatural experience that took place around 1979. I have written about this many times here on ATS if you are interested see:

The Varieties of ATS Religious Experience, page 4
What is your faith?, page 2
The End...What is the Sign?, page 2
Please do not call yourselves Christians any more, page 15
How is the Bible not considered channeled information?, page 4
THE INCREDIBLE BIBLE MIRACLE!

a reply to: coomba98

Your words mean absolutely NOTHING if your actions contradict them.

Neither you or Barcs have come up with any 'actual data'...

Instead of credibility, all I see is hypocrisy.

Like I told him, REALLY nice job of making yourself look completely like a fool...

a reply to: Murgatroid

What data are you looking for, in particular?

a reply to: Murgatroid

Useless posting, while moving the goalposts. And hiding them.

Bring up a point for discussion and stop dismissing contradictionary points given to you!

a reply to: Murgatroid

Youngling, I was born a fool so there is no trying, only being.

And yet a fool has higher mental capacity than some, hey Murgatroid.

Coomba98

originally posted by: madenusa

What happened to souls before Jesus?
The letter “J” wasn’t invented until the mid 1500’s. Do the math,it was IMPOSSIBLE for his name to be Jesus,it may be possible for him to be named Yahweh or Ayesha, then why didn’t the bible write it that way?
I believe in an all-loving higher Source.

The dead sea scrolls contain many Hebrew and Aramaic writings of Jesus/Yeshua which would have been the languages familiar to him at the time. Yeshua who was later known as Ιησούς in the Greek, and then pronounced as Jesus in contemporary English.

Of course the people of the time didn't refer to him as "Jesus", they would have referred to him as Yeshua or Yehoshua

Why is god assumed to be a man? Why can’t god be a woman? Why can’t god be, the source without religious or gender connotations?It becomes blatantly obvious how naive people can be when they believe everything they read in the bible without questioning anything.

Human conception gives us the best idea why God is masculine. Would Mary have gotten pregnant by a Feminine spirit, or a Male spirit? A female and a female do not conceive, it requires a male and a female. In this case the Male was the most High Source that you speak of... a "source" is denoted as masculine, whereas the receptor of the source is denoted as feminine. This is why vessels are always given a feminine denomination, whereas the thing that fills it (in this case the Spirit) is given a masculine connotation. The Source comes before that which receives it, so if the Source came first we can understand why the Prime Source Creative Force would be denoted as Masculine. Before Mary it was matter (from the latin 'mater' meaning "mother"), or earth, that the Source Spirit conceived into a living being.

originally posted by: cooperton
The dead sea scrolls contain many Hebrew and Aramaic writings of Jesus/Yeshua which would have been the languages familiar to him at the time. Yeshua who was later known as Ιησούς in the Greek, and then pronounced as Jesus in contemporary English.

The dead sea scrolls did not mention Jesus / Yeshua. They were all old testament writings referring to different people.

a reply to: Murgatroid



What do you mean by this……...

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Murgatroid

What do you mean by this……...

He's insinuating that we are being silly for agreeing with what the scientific method has empirically demonstrated to us. Funny because he still hasn't given any valid arguments. He just keeps that silly crusade against science going as if it somehow validates his faith.

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: Murgatroid

What do you mean by this……...

He's insinuating that we are being silly for agreeing with what the scientific method has empirically demonstrated to us. Funny because he still hasn't given any valid arguments.

Its not easy to give a valid validation when Our Forth Estate is clounding the waters for us. You know..... There are many media that challenge the texts within the Bible. Our scientific community is also one of them. Their goals is to try and create a diversity between us thinkers.

You have been here for a long time...... You know that there is something wrong. But can you put your finger on it?

The Bible of today is edited, twisted, and nobody knows what is original text, anymore, or even if anything at all is still the original text.

A conflicting passage is not likely. More likely it is added later on, or an edited version of it.


What I find most interesting is Genesis, the creation of Earth, the description of Earth, which fits perfectly, as I see it.


Earth is not a ball, flying through space.

a reply to: cooperton

What do the Dead Sea Scrolls say about Jesus? Nothing.

What do they say about the world in which Jesus lived? Lots. The Dead Sea Scrolls are comprised primarily of two types of texts: parts of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) and sectarian works written by the small group (or groups) of Jews who lived at Qumran. The scrolls date from the mid-third century B.C.E. until the mid-first century C.E.

While the Dead Sea Scrolls do not shed light on the person or ministry of Jesus, they do illuminate practices and beliefs of ancient Judaism. Since Christianity began as a sect of Judaism, the scrolls are very important for understanding the earliest Christians and their writings—the New Testament.

In the March/April 2015 issue of BAR, James C. VanderKam, the John A. O’Brien Professor of Hebrew Scriptures in the theology department at the University of Notre Dame, examines the overlap between these two bodies of texts in his article “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament.” Dr. VanderKam was a member of the committee that prepared the scrolls for publication.

www.biblicalarchaeology.org...

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: cooperton

What do the Dead Sea Scrolls say about Jesus? Nothing.

What do they say about the world in which Jesus lived? Lots. The Dead Sea Scrolls are comprised primarily of two types of texts: parts of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) and sectarian works written by the small group (or groups) of Jews who lived at Qumran. The scrolls date from the mid-third century B.C.E. until the mid-first century C.E.

While the Dead Sea Scrolls do not shed light on the person or ministry of Jesus, they do illuminate practices and beliefs of ancient Judaism. Since Christianity began as a sect of Judaism, the scrolls are very important for understanding the earliest Christians and their writings—the New Testament.

In the March/April 2015 issue of BAR, James C. VanderKam, the John A. O’Brien Professor of Hebrew Scriptures in the theology department at the University of Notre Dame, examines the overlap between these two bodies of texts in his article “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament.” Dr. VanderKam was a member of the committee that prepared the scrolls for publication.

www.biblicalarchaeology.org...

Yeah good catch. Was mixing up the dead sea scrolls (written in Aramaic and Hebrew) with the Nag Hammadi find (Discusses Jesus extensively). The apostles spoke Aramaic so they almost definitely wrote the original copies in Aramaic which were likely soon after translated into Greek to spread the word to the gentiles. Finding the original Aramaic would be tough considering how difficult it is to preserve papyrus and parchment for thousands of years. Considering that many of the copies would have been in Greek it is no surprise we haven't found any in Aramaic. Also interesting to consider that the Aramaic-speaking world experienced Jesus first hand, so replicating copies of the Gospel for them would not have been as productive as replicating it for the Greeks.

originally posted by: Toolman18
youtu.be...

No doubt our existence was created. Not a product of evolution. It's weird to me that this is a subject of debate.
Everything is too perfect. And unexplainable.
I will never take someone seriously if they say God doesn't exist.
I'm aware that's a harsh statement. But it's true.
You're an idiot if you don't accept this because all of you know its true. You chose to ignore it because it's hard.
But we all will die. And will have to give account of our lives. No excuses in front of the Creator.
And that's it. Live to give praise to the creator and his children.

 

Community Announcement re: Decorum

Wow... congratulations on making one of the single dumbest posts ive ever seen on any website, ever.

(My favorite part is when you claim that people dont believe in god because its too "hard." Yes, they are the ones afraid to face the hard truth, as opposed to the people who believe a silly fairy tale just so they can cling to the pitiful hope that they wont actually stop existing when they die.)

Funny, i wont take anyone seriously if they try to claim definitively that god does exist, seeing as how you have no way of knowing that. Which means that YOU are an idiot if you blindly believe it just because things are hard to explain and it makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside to have an imaginary answer/explanation.
And actually, most things are explainable! There's this cool new thing called "science," you should check it out some time!

The Bible as it stands now is a edited work of history. Pet literal and part false. If you add in all the missing text and cross reference what goes on to other religious works. It has more validity than most school books. It may not be 100% true but it is surely true enough to tell that God exists. Have to take it back to the Torah tho to Adonai who was Enki. And there was also the Elohim to contend with who backed Abraham. Very fascinating to research.