Reasons To Believe

reply to post by brainwrek


Because:

1. The painters didn't think it through.
2. They did have 'em, because it was already coded in their DNA.
3. It's all a *snip* lie.

reply to post by maximumpower


But could anyone who is true to what they believe say that anything else is also true? That sounds like cowardice (no offense) if a person is accepting of all things as viable options.

The argument here usually comes down to the question of "Can there be multiple truths even if they contradict each other?"

Both Jews and Buddhists cannot be right, just as both Christians and Athiests cannot be right, or Muslims and Wiccans can't both be right. If I say that each of these are viable ways, I have denied my own faith and am just trying to please people, where really I am lying and sending them off to their own destruction. Hopefully this shows the reason for why we are the way we are. I cannot excuse the actions of all Christians. Please do not think I am trying to justify those things done wrong or rudely.

reply to post by Nichiren


Graduated with a Bachelor's degree froma Bible college. By saying I am a student I mean that I am constantly trying to improve my knowledge of just about anything I can concerning the Word and the World. I am no expert because my own knowledge pales in comparison to those who taught at the school, whom I didn't always agree with but were still very intellectual.

It is only because of the Sciences that I've been convinced of the factually apparent GOD of the Biblical epic.

The Sciences were founded on doubt and the rigors of its processes reasonable, but what it found has only served to establish Bible, not in any way disprove the literal Hebrew words composing it, and they too have proved True by way of the same Scientific rigor!

reply to post by brainwrek


Because it's something that an artist might forget since they are so used to painting it? I have no idea. You would have to ask them lol.

Originally posted by Mykahel
Yes, the words came from man, but were inspired by God. I too questioned those things I was taught and doubted many of them. I searched for my own answers and have got some of them, but not all. I still believe.

I assume your arguments end with the basic point that the Bible was written by failable man and that is why you place no stock in it. I would argue that God uses failable men all the time to accomplish His will. If I am mistaken about your argument, please help me so I can better understand. I know you have to decide for yourself and I probably won't prove anything, but if you are open to it I would like to know these issues you have. peace.

Why would these men, if they were inspired by God, remove words that their very inspiration wrote? Why would this divine being that had previously inspired these men to write these books, inspire others at two later points in time to change his work? Was the message incomplete or incorrect?

The point I am making is not necessarily that I don't trust man (which I surely do not lol)... the point I am trying to get across is that I can not connect the dots between an almighty God inspiring men to write down his message... then inspiring men at 2 later dates to alter his message. If I were to accept that God inspired all those who wrote a book in the Bible, and also those who rewrote it, it raises a lot of questions.

I guess the more I try to put this into words, I need to know this before I start making deductive leaps:

Who was inspired by God? The original writers, the men at the Council of Nicaea, or the bishops/whoever it was that King James hired? Was it all three?

EDIT: Was looking over your post and as I read this paragraph again I think I can use it to tie into what I'm trying to get across...

To be honest, the King James has done terrible harm to the faith. there are some (The King James Only or KJO) who say that the King James is the ONLY inspired translation of the Bible and that they are in fact the exact words of God and any other translation is a heresy and so on so forth.

I'll be honest with you and admit that when I've raised my argument with friends who are staunch believers or acquaintances who happen to be Christian, the overwhelming majority had never even heard of the Council of Nicaea and to lesser extent a lot of them didn't know about the King James revision either.

I came back to quote the paragraph above because, with all due respect, who are you to question the King James revision to begin with? What separates those scribes from the ones at Council of Nicaea? What would qualify the scribes at the Council of Nicaea to be more divinely inspired than those who were hired by King James?

My beef isn't that "man" wrote it down. My beef is man CHANGED IT. If I walk into a store today, purchase a Bible, then time travel back to the Council of Nicaea, steal all the books and run into the woods to read them... I can say with certainty that they are NOT the same, if I were a betting man I would go as far as putting my money on they're not even close.

I would be much more receptive to the Bible had someone etched it into granite as God was speaking to him and it survives to this day. Turns out this supposedly happened, just no one has them, no one can prove they ever had them, and no one can prove they were even created.

I understand it's called faith... how many "just trust mes" is too much?

They are the words of God, trust me.
Who is God? He is the almighty creator and he told me this was how he did it, trust me.
I'm Moses and I spoke to God, trust me.
I knew Moses and he had the tablets, trust me.
I knew Jesus and he was God incarnate, trust me.
I know of Jesus and I know he said this 100 years ago, trust me.
God's words needing some revising but it was all divinely inspired, trust me.
Well now that I think about it, God didn't mean to write this, I'm going to bury it, trust me.
Whoops back again, God's work needs more revising, don't worry though, we are divinely inspired again, trust me.

Given the nature of man, there are too many opportunities to exploit the power a story of this magnitude... and given that we know about Constantine and King James, I'd say it probably already happened.









[edit on 17-2-2010 by ImaNutter]

[edit on 17-2-2010 by ImaNutter]

I believe in God. Just not religion, Does that make me wrong? What if I end up joining the wrong religion and going to hell anyways, Even though I've lived a loyal life to that religion?

Bottom line, I can join a religion and end up in hell for following the wrong religion anyways. Yes, I've searched and havent found one I would call a God worthy religion, They all seem to have major faults I cant overlook. In any case, Christianity would defiently not be my first choice. Though I have to admit I do admire the Muslim faith, I dont see many other religions faithful enough to blow themselves up for their God.

reply to post by ImaNutter


What two dates altered it?
We have the Dead Sea Scrolls covering the entire Old Testament and then some!
And they are not showing any points of departure but rather that the copyists were critically accurate!
Rather I'd say the only departure has been in the transmitions reception -as we've only "lost" their definition of terms and made our own interpretations!

[edit on 2010/2/17 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]

Originally posted by Mykahel
reply to post by Nichiren

 

A distortion of it perhaps. Before the fall of man, there was no death or disease and so the snakes would have been completely harmless.

Not the talking-one, though. That serpent was mighty evil. But wait, didn't the guy create everything himself and he saw that everything was good?

In the Genesis account it reads that every plant was given for food for every animal. Perhaps some animals were made to be carnivorous beforehand because God knew the fall would eventually happen.

There was no death, but some animals were carnivorous. Interesting ... ! What about overpopulation if there are no natural predators. I'm also thinking of bacterial growth. Damn those pesky Darwinists.

Nothing says that Adam and Eve were kids when they were formed. We have no idea at what age they would have been upon their being created.

I just wanted to point out that they had the minds of kids ---> no knowledge.

God never said he would kill them, he said they would "surely die." They did eventually die as a direct result of the curse. They could have lived forever.

Which way is it now? Did he bring on the curse on mankind, or he didn't? (The serpent was only the instigator, but didn't curse anybody). If he did so he de facto killed Adam and Eve.

By us falling and suffering death, God has now allowed for the opportunity for us to love Him and for Him to express his unending love for us.

That is a bit too S&M for me. An omniscient being can surely think of another way. But then again,

God wants a real relationship with us, and that means we have to have choice. He knew our choice would come at a great cost to Him, but He wanted a relationship with us so much that he was willing to pay the price, knowing he would have to from the very beginning. Hope that helps.

Please think it through. Since he is omnipotent and omniscient, your implications re his modus operandi are, let's say, interesting.

reply to post by SaturnFX

False Dilemma Fallacy

A False Dilemma is a fallacy in which a person uses the following pattern of "reasoning":


Either claim X is true or claim Y is true (when X and Y could both be false).
Claim Y is false.
Therefore claim X is true.
This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because if both claims could be false, then it cannot be inferred that one is true because the other is false. That this is the case is made clear by the following example:


Either 1+1=4 or 1+1=12.
It is not the case that 1+1=4.
Therefore 1+1=12.
In cases in which the two options are, in fact, the only two options, this line of reasoning is not fallacious. For example:


Bill is dead or he is alive.
Bill is not dead.
Therefore Bill is alive.
Examples of False Dilemma

Senator Jill: "We'll have to cut education funding this year."
Senator Bill: "Why?"
Senator Jill: "Well, either we cut the social programs or we live with a huge deficit and we can't live with the deficit."

Bill: "Jill and I both support having prayer in public schools."
Jill: "Hey, I never said that!"
Bill: "You're not an atheist are you Jill?"

"Look, you are going to have to make up your mind. Either you decide that you can afford this stereo, or you decide you are going to do without music for a while."

[edit on 17-2-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

reply to post by Mykahel


Thank you for your reply. You are a good, decent man!

John Godfrey Saxe's ( 1816-1887) version of the famous Indian legend,


It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he,
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

Be well,

N

Originally posted by Mykahel
reply to post by Nichiren

 

On top of not being worthy to be with God, we are guilty of sin and the punishment is death. Jesus, however, paid that price already for us on the cross. By cleansing us of our imperfections and taking our punishment, Jesus has opened the door for us to enter into the presence of God and enjoy the reward he has waiting for us.

Where exactly does it say in the bible that Jesus paid the price for our sins?

That's to ask where to the binding theology of the entire New Testament!
To err is Human, to be able stand corrected is the Divine gift!

[edit on 2010/2/17 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]

reply to post by ATC_GOD


Just wanted to point out that your avatar is brilliant. Very relevant to this thread

Originally posted by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU
reply to post by ImaNutter

 

What two dates altered it?
We have the Dead Sea Scrolls covering the entire Old Testament and then some!
And they are not showing any points of departure but rather that the copyists were critically accurate!
Rather I'd say the only departure has been in the transmitions reception -as we've only "lost" their definition of terms and made our own interpretations!

[edit on 2010/2/17 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]

hehe.. I dare not waste my time to tell you of all the ecumenical councils. Start with the Council of Jerusalem in 50 AD, google the ecumenical councils inbetween, and end with the King James revision in ~1600 AD.

Dead Sea Scrolls has little to no bearing on Christianity (they don't even mention Jesus!!!! and were written after his time!!!) DSS even goes as far to HELP me make my point because there were lots of writings LEFT OUT from the Hebrew Bible that were found in the DSS.

Why is YHWH, a perfect, all powerful, all knowing entity... letting man edit his masterpiece so much?! Why didn't he just write the darn thing once?

The Bible has been nothing but an interpretation of a translation of a translation that was an interpretation of an interpretation interpreted 20 times before. And now we find things like the DSS that prove as much, prove that we were not/are not given the entire picture.

And now that we know this, we are still supposed to believe and take the Bible we read today as gospel? We're told it is THE guide to how to live your life, yet this guide is on it's, ol I don't know, 40th version by now? What kind of perfect being needs 40 versions to get it right?

We aren't even talking about faiths outside Christianity, Christians can't even agree what the bible should say!! But they do all agree that the blasphemers should hear this good word... even though none of them can agree what the good word actually is.

And in the end, we hear an esoteric explanation (which is funny/ironic in its own right) into their own interpretation of the Bible and God, to make up for the inconsistencies THAT individual found/picked up on in the Bible/Christianity... while the funny part is they are basing their belief in God to begin with thanks to the Bible... which they now have no problem questioning and revising in their OWN way, just to keep the merry go round going.

Which came first, your belief in God or you being taught the Bible? hmmm...





[edit on 17-2-2010 by ImaNutter]

reply to post by spaz490


can you list the contradictions please?

reply to post by Nichiren


to all that seem to be against there being a god or Christianity can you tell me what you believe in. Did anyone know they found chariot parts at the bottom of the red sea? Did you know there is a documentary on the exodus chapter and they walked the full length of it and there is a lot of evidence still there today that collaborates with what is written in the bible.

No i'm not a Christian I've been looking at a lot of things and this is starting to be the only reason as evolution has no real basis especially when when the main thing for evolution is fossils now before you reply find out how they find the age of those fossils then find out how they find out how old the soil is they come from. Yes i have just answered half of the question

reply to post by ImaNutter


While the "Old Testament" remains unmodified from it's original state, it is only the Greek "New Testament" which has notable differences between texts, but these have come to be recognized as Translation based (from Hebrew originals) or Greek Copyist related, yet it also stands true with scrutiny today!

It is not the Biblical textual sources where any real problem can be nailed down but rather our ideas and concepts interpreting its terms!

There are yes about 50 NT codices and they only differ in slight, but there are also about 50 "Version"s of Translation out contradicting each-other dramatically (and somewhat contradicting themselves!), but bring in an Interlinear (Heb. Gr. Eng.) Bible and it settles all... everytime!

[edit on 2010/2/17 by YeHUaH ELaHaYNU]

Originally posted by Coemgen

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by Conclusion
reply to post by spy66

 

Hmmm. I like the way you think.

Now that is a wise post. You have a sharp mind there my friend.

Good job.

Thx. And just notice no one will challenge it.

Just ask them what we humans are made up of. And i bet 99% of them will say different types of energies at some point in time. Then ask them what everything that exists is made up of. And i bet a 100% will say energy.

...
If our combination of specific energy can create a independent mind. Wouldn't a infinite amount of energy have a theoretical chance of having a mind as well?

I would really like a answer to that question.

If there are different dimensions and we cannot sense all of them it is entirely possible that some energies may exist in a dimension we cannot sense. The idea / concept of thought and idea / concept of the soul, may be energies existing in a dimension that people cannot sense, but we can perceive it.

If a person has a soul, then the universe on some level must encompass this energy associated with the soul. This is the same with thought.

On a larger perspective, a human brain looks very similar to the universe. The concepts that the functions of the brain entail can be perceived, if a person thinks of the Universe as a big brain... or perhaps a star is a living life form... Perhaps the energy that exists on the planet earth, most of it comes from the sun. Intuitively, the energy that exists as a result came from the son. Is it possible that the energy that is our existence traces back to the energy from the son.

Are there any ideas or symbols that point to the sun... anywhere... could someone look at the horizon and see an image of something pointing at the sun?

Is there anything that symbolizes a structure of a triangle with a father mother and child? .... If there was would the son be in haven ( home ) in the sky ?

I am not sure what you mean by dimensions. But you could use infinite and finite to help me understand your point of whew.

Energy is both infinite and finite and its the difference that makes up existence.

If energy was infinite before some of it became a finite. Do you believe the infinite energy could have a intelligent mind. Or can only a specific combinations of finite energy have a intelligent mind?

God created Man in his image. If God is pure infinite energy. God cant have the image of a Man. Man has a finite combination of energy in the shape of a Human.

When God created man in he's image. God must have meant our creative mind. God didn't look in a mirror and say. Hay i have to create more humans that look like me. Its not how we look that is important its what we think and do that is important.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

well i believe in God and that jesus died on the cross to save us.

and in habakkuk it is suppose to tell you how god became
and to what i would say to the people that say how can i prove he is real
i say were alive its a mirrical that we survive all the stuff in life some people just need to think of it.
To also go along with the people that say ooooo i got you mad well in the bible it also says in are human body we are going to sin and it is are responsibility to try and fight it.
its called will power people learn it