Is there any credibility with The Kolbrin Bible?

reply to post by Byrd


Very nicely done

I played WoW too what's your GS? Mine was 6000 but I was a pally tank and I wore cloth so that didnt work out too well I stopped playing just before cata came out Never mind i get dressed and wash and stuff now!

reply to post by awake_and_aware


I don't believe I am cherry picking. I am not ignoring the parts I don't like. I am ignoring/working around the man made interpretations, doctrines and dogma. The denominations I refer to are man made (examples: Lutherans, Baptists, Protestants, Catholics, etc). I refuse to be a part of these sects. I also refuse to follow another's interpretation. Why do I need that when I can interpret scripture with scripture (while also considering other factors) and decide for myself? Why do I need to follow the interpretations that have been passed down from generation to generation likely being skewed along the way? I don't. My Grandpa was a preacher so I am not a stranger to common beliefs.

I will admit that the Bible has problems. Man decided what books would be in the Canon. Man decided what words would be translated in what way. I am sure that parts were reworded to suit the translator's own agenda. Also, differences in languages could have been partly to blame. For example, the word Adam can be translated to mean dust, man or mankind. The word Eve can also mean life bearer. So knowing the other possible meanings of the words used, we know that there may not have been a literal Adam and Eve in the sense that there were just two people to spawn the entire human race. I am hoping this example helps you to understand what I mean when talking about interpreting scripture. Its a huge puzzle that begs to be put together considering what we know today about the origins of the Bible and the twist that man undoubtedly put on the text. We also have to consider the perspective of the writers themselves. It was a different world back then. If we threw one of the prophets from the Bible into the streets of New York City, he would be terrified. This has to be considered when trying to interpret unfulfilled prophecies.

Adam (Hebrew: אָדָם‎, ʼĀḏām, "dust; man; mankind"; Arabic: آدم‎, ʼĀdam) and Eve (Hebrew: חַוָּה‎, Ḥawwā, "living one") were, according to the Book of Genesis, the first man and woman created by God. Read more: www.answers.com...

Many Hebrew/Greek words translate to have more than one meaning, Adam and Eve are an appropriate example of this. The translator could have picked whichever definition that he felt was suited to the translation, or his own aims.

I study scripture with these things in mind and form my own interpretation. Again, using scripture to interpret scripture. Consulting the concordance as well as texts that are not part of the Canon being that I do not know if they were originally intended be be an actual part of the Bible or not. I also think other texts provide insight into the world back then. We can gain a better understanding of the writer and his perspective by not discounting non-canonical texts just because man said it wasn't important enough to be included.

I really have no actual evidence to back up the faith that I have. I really enjoy studying scripture (namely prophecy) and I feel like it is right, It sits well with me. I believe it. I believe that the original intent has not been lost entirely. I cannot prove it to you, but i just know it. I am sure that makes no sense to anyone. But, I cannot prove to you that God exists, you (or anyone else) cannot prove that He does not.

I am sure my perspective is flawed and surely wouldn't fly in the modern church scene. After all, I am just "some girl" who is certainly far from perfection and I admit that. The definition of Deism seems to partially fit. I had heard of it but never heard the definition before. Maybe I am somewhere in between kind of doing my "own thing".

So you are an atheist? From what I am remembering? How is that you arrived at your conclusion? I am curious how one can look at the world around them and not see at least some intelligence behind it all.

reply to post by daryllyn

I really have no actual evidence to back up the faith that I have. I really enjoy studying scripture (namely prophecy) and I feel like it is right, It sits well with me. I believe it. I believe that the original intent has not been lost entirely. I cannot prove it to you, but i just know it. I am sure that makes no sense to anyone. But, I cannot prove to you that God exists, you (or anyone else) cannot prove that He does not.

I understand "FAITH" - but I would be dishonest if i was to say i respect it. I need evidence to assert a belief.

A belief in God is one thing (Deism) but to go further and claim to know the being's thoughts/desires/commands/personality (THEISM or Organised religion) is just absurd without evidence.

The logic and philosophy in the bible is often contradictory, if this really is the true word of God it would at least be somewhat enlightening to even the modern intellectual. It seems it's morally, philosophically and logically detestable which is easy to understand when you accept the idea that the bible is MAN-MADE, Our philosophy, morals has since evolved from these times.

Again, i can't prove that God doesn't not exist, but i CAN prove a few of the GOD(s) written about by men do not in fact exist. Earthquakes and floods ARE NOT supernatural punishment, we live on a heating and cooling planet, it's not God.

Evolution negates the intelligent design idea, it shows we are evolved species, not created. Of course, you could just say God created "evolution" but that has nothing to offer in debate, it's intellectually bankrupt.

Although i think reality is beautiful, it certainly is destructive - 99.8% of all species on earth have died out (we nearly died out at one point) Gallaxies colliding and destroying much of their content in the process, Our Sun will eventually burn out, not before boiling the waters of our oceans - I ask you, although this may seem "intelligent" - it certainly wasn't designed with us humans in mind, although we have been lucky enough to survive so far. It's evident that "GOD" is malevolent, tyrranous and capricious, the God of the bible is even worse - I'm sure you've read the story of Abraham and Isaac.

This is my position:-

Agnostic atheism, also called atheistic agnosticism, is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism.[1] Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity, and agnostic because they claim not to know or be able to know whether any deity exists.[1][2] The agnostic atheist may be contrasted with the agnostic theist, who does believe that one or more deities exist but does not claim to have knowledge of such.

I don't believe ancient scripture to be evidence of God. (At a mimimum) this "GOD" waits 75,000 years of human evolution before introducing a savior and enlightment in the form of floods and death to humans, this is not God, these are the thoughts of man. Also, the earth was not made 6,000 years ago but some Evangelical Christians believe it is despite evidence to the contrary.

I'm not being rude, and i respect you as a person, i respect your words and opinion for the purpose of this debate - this is just one thing we disagree on but i'm offering my argument and you; yours

It's been a pleasure to exchange words, thanks for being so polite; Again, i don't intend to cause offense, People may have a disagreements in any arena of debate; politics, sport, medicine, i don't think religion is different, and i don't think it is free from criticism.

Peace

P.S I don't think i ever "converted" to Atheism, i just never accepted the theory of God, or at least any of the organised religions theories. My mind has always been wired this way; sceptical, inquizitive. I was raised in a family with vague faith, i sung hyms in school and enjoyed some of the stories in the bible but had major concerns with the metaphysical claims (God, miracles, afterlife; heavena nd hell)

reply to post by awake_and_aware


I have to say that even though I do not agree with you at all, I still respect your opinions/thoughts/theories. I am completely okay with others not agreeing with me just as I am fine with respectably agreeing to disagree with others on their beliefs. To each his/her own. Everyone is different. If they were not, every conversation would be boring and there would be no debates.

I understand your view on faith, as it is a common one. Its something that I cannot explain, or back up with irrefutable evidence. But I will happily hold on to it despite the view/opinions of the majority and I don't expect anyone to understand/respect it/care about it/like it. It is one of those things that no one can take away.

I didn't always believe, just so you know. Its something that came as I got older, even though the interest has always been there. If you don't mind my asking, how old are you? Just curious..

reply to post by daryllyn

understand your view on faith, as it is a common one.

I don't think it is - the majority of the world's population practice a religion, Atheism is still considered a minority. On the other hand, the majority of scientists admit they are Atheists....but that is a small sample group.

It's certainly not common practice for scientists to believe without evidence, you'd expect the same rationale in regards to religion or the God question.

Although there doesn't seem to be much Atheism or (non-belief) in the middle East and even in western countries like the U.S and U.K, some countries (Sweden, for example) have a majority of non-believers.

I never have been a fan of the appeal to majority argument (Argumentum ad populum) , and that wouldn't be enough to buy my faith.

Nor a fan of the Argument from ignorance

I'm not saying you're ignorant or a sheep that follows the masses only that i do not accept the above arguments as evidence or logic in regards to God.

I admit that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", but by that measure i could claim that reality is infinity, and there is no need for a God. This would be dishonest of me, i don't know, science doesn't know, it hasn't found out (YET)

I'm 21, you?

I found that as i got older i further confirmed my disbelief by looking at different philosophical points of view and studying evolution/astronomy.

What made you assert your belief? or at least reject your earlier doubts?

Originally posted by Versa
reply to post by Byrd

 

Very nicely done

Thank you. I'm adding some additional stuff just below.

I played WoW too what's your GS? Mine was 6000 but I was a pally tank and I wore cloth so that didnt work out too well

I stopped playing just before cata came out

Never mind i get dressed and wash and stuff now!

I'm a "character-holic." I have 47 characters across about 10 servers (Horde and Alliance), play all races and classes, and now have 3 level 85's (including a holy priest geared for Cataclysm Heroic healing), 4 80's and the rest are all over the place down to a level 10 warrior I started because a friend's guild needs a tank.

Anyway....

I looked into breakaway Jewish sects (including the Essenes and Christians): one thing they all had in common was that they kept the original "Hebrew Bible" -- the Torah. There wasn't any rewriting of Genesis (and certainly not in many different forms from many different cultures.) From a religious viewpoint, having multiple tales of origin for a single faith makes no sense -- the faith needs a coherent theology which explains the world and how it came to be and how people came to be -- with consistent naming and consistent hierarchy.

This book does not fit the pattern of all religious sects in this matter. A "Bible" (of which there were none in 37 AD, though the Torah ("Hebrew Bible") had been compiled by then) which does not set out the sect's history, religious law, and history of humanity/Earth (all three) and identifies the sacred clearly is not a text of any use to a religious group. The "Kolbrin Bible" presents multiple creation accounts, no genealogies, no list of laws and taboos, and multiple accounts of creation, none of which are truly consistent with Hebrew (early Christian) belief. So the idea that this is a "bible" of a Christian sect seems to be a clear fiction.

Next, I looked into non-canonical books of the Bible to see if this fit any of the patterns. These books (Tobit, Bel and the Dragon, etc) feature short sentences, are tales or lists of parables (or poetry), include genealogy. They are simple in structure (everything was hand written... without printing, composing a short book took days and weeks (or months) of time.) This is not true of the purported "Kolbrin Bible."

selected quotes from the site

Millennia ago, Egyptian and Celtic authors recorded prophetic warnings for the future and their harbinger signs are now converging on 2012.

In fact, the Egyptians weren't into prophecies and there was no system of writing among the Celts until the Romans brought Latin and also the Ogham alphabet (later) to Britain. That was about 50 BC (Ogham dates to 400 AD.)

These predications are contained in The Kolbrin Bible, a secular wisdom text studied in the days of Jesus and lovingly preserved by generations of Celtic mystics in Great Britain.

In this case, there would be many references to these books and they must have been written before 0 AD. Jesus (and Jewish writers) would have quoted them or referenced them (see lists of ex-canonical books in the Wikipedia article which includes references in the Bible to some of these books.)

Nearly as big as the King James Bible, this 3600-year old text warns of an imminent, Armageddon-like conflict with radical Islam, but this is not the greatest threat.

That puts the text (note that now it's not being written over time but predates the Torah as a set of manuscripts) not in 0 AD but 1400 BC. Radical Islam (or Islam of any form) won't arise until 2,000 years after the time that the website says this book was written and no one had any inkling it would arise.

3600 years ties into the "2012" thing and Velikovsky (muchly debunked) and so forth.

The authors of The Kolbrin Bible predict an end to life as we know it, by a celestial event. It will be the return of a massive space object, in a long elliptical orbit around our sun. Known to the Egyptians and Hebrews as the "Destroyer," the Celts later called it the “Frightener."

Now, as many know, I'm quite familiar with ancient Egypt and literature. There's no such item in any Egyptian (or Hebrew or Celt) tradition/legend/writing/reference. "The Destroyer" is the hippo-crocodile demon that eats the heart of liars in Egyptian references and waits for everyone in the afterlife. It doesn't come around every 3600 years. Writings from other sources show that no planet appeared in the skies 3600 years ago, and archaeology (as well as eyewitness reports from historians, monuments, etc) show that there was NO worldwide disaster 3600 years ago.

Additional space is taken up about "Nibiru" showing that the material comes directly from sources that did not exist before 1990.

Finally, the sheer wordiness of the text with overly elaborate explanations and so forth is jarringly out of line with ancient writings.

reply to post by Redevilfan09


I was curious about this, because I heard that early Christian missionaries came to what was then Albion (U.K. and Ireland now) with a fully formed Bible before it was influenced by pagan Rome and Greece. This is known as the Culdee Bible and has probably rotted away. The Kolbrin Bible is not this.

Let me make something very clear, I understand the longing for the perfect Bible, the one that explains creation in a more scientific way, the one that clears up all misconceptions and issues. The problem is that there are people who are aware of this desire and will capitalize on it. They come forward with "lost" books or "secret" books and they are "eye-candy" (as Mr. Kimball puts it) to the people who just aren't satisfied with the 66-81 Biblical texts of Orthodox Christians. If you are an Orthodox (as in you believe in mainstream Christianity and aren't Mormon or Gnostic) you should have some respect for the warning at the end of Revelations regarding adding to or subtracting from the Bible. The forward in the Kolbrin Bible is enough to show you that this is not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, seeing as Kimball tells you to "follow the god of your heart". Pretty ambiguous huh? Christianity and Judaism are not.

Also, consider the concept of "lost" books or deliberately "hidden" books. The word of YHWH is meant to be shouted in the streets not hidden in an abbey away from the common folk that might need it. If YHWH's word is in a book, how would it be lost to time and memory (like the Nag Hammadi texts)? None of these texts are quoted by the early church fathers and they directly contradict the Tanakh and the NT. The Book of Enoch on the other hand, which some regard as having been lost, is quoted by Jude, does not contradict scripture, bears witness to Ya'hshuah (or atleast I think so), and was never really lost at all, instead it flourished and was well kept by the Ethiopians.

This is all moot point reserved for genuine ancient heretical texts. I think Kimball pulled this out of his ass. There are no brackets, no notes, no translation explanations, it is in perfect modern English, and seems a bit too convenient. I mean, God re-explained creation in such a way to reconcile it with a 21st century scientific standpoint? I think it's BS but go ahead and read it, it should be entertaining.

reply to post by kallisti36

Looking back at some research I did when the Kolbrin Bible first appeared, I found a description of it in some publicity material by Marshall Masters, who is referred to above. The summary says -

“The Kolbrin Bible is a 2-part, 11-book secular anthology. The first six books are called the "Egyptian texts" and were penned by Egyptian academicians following the Hebrew Exodus. The last five books are called the "Celtic texts" and were penned by Celtic priests following the death of Jesus.

Historical accounts in The Kolbrin Bible offers numerous prescient descriptions of a large reddish object called "The Destroyer," which orbits our Sun. It also correlates to Nostradamus's "Bearded Star," Mother Shipton's "Fiery Dragon" and the "Red Comet" warning of the Mayan Calendar 2012 Prophecies.

The Egyptians tell us it caused Noah’s Flood and the Ten Plagues of Exodus. They warn us it will return with catastrophic results in the near future, and many of the harbinger signs offered in the text have are now coming to pass.”

There’s no evidence to suggest that there was any difference between the ‘Culdian’ Kolbrin and the ‘Marshall Masters’ version. My view is that the whole text was written in the last 10 years, and was put together to support the sales of publications about Planet X, Nibiru, 2012 and methods of surviving catastrophic events. Have a look at material by Masters and Kimball, including ‘Indigo-ET Connection’ and ‘Planet X Forecast and 2012 Survival Guide’, among others. There is no identifiable reference to the alleged works or their content prior to 2004, and particularly there is nothing to suggest that its text was ever kept at Glastonbury.

If the Kolbrin had the history claimed for it, it would be the most important cache of found documents since the Dead Sea Scrolls. Instead, it limped out on the Internet on, I suspect, a ‘print to order’ basis, and has been ignored even by a media desperate for historical and religious mysteries. At best, it would seem to have been an ambitious, but unsuccessful hoax.

reply to post by Snippy23


Snippy,

I am glad you have an opinion without research, these manuscripts are older than ten years, I will agree they are not as old as some would like to think but really do research, please begin with my first post that states pros and cons of the text. The "masters" bible and the real text are different, did you read them? They have nothing to do with 2012, really.


Byrd,

Let’s stick to the subject matter Mod, can we please? We are all suppose to stick to the subject per rules but a chosen few you pick to talk about a video game with you while on the subject of the Kolbrin texts is ok, this is how you moderate? This is not a Christian Bible or the Jewish Torah as well, thank you for pointing out the differences but you are baiting for a bible discussion not a Kolbrin manuscripts discussion....thank you very much for following the rules as well......

Originally posted by robinmorningstar

Originally posted by seedofchucky
creadibility + bible same sentence = oxymoron

I really get annoyed when people say things such as that above. The Bible (not talking about the Kolbrin bible which I know little about) is the number one selling text of all time, studied and reveared by societies and cultures for generations. You don't know as much as you think you do, but if you have an inkling of understanding, use it not to disrespect others faith. It's rude and obtuse, and I grow tired of the arrogance of that nature...

Yeah, best selling, but "credible?"

What's rude and obtuse is your attempt to shut down a discussion about a book because it offends you.

Originally posted by Byrd

Now, as many know, I'm quite familiar with ancient Egypt and literature. There's no such item in any Egyptian (or Hebrew or Celt) tradition/legend/writing/reference. "The Destroyer" is the hippo-crocodile demon that eats the heart of liars in Egyptian references and waits for everyone in the afterlife.

Are you referencing Apep? also called Apophis? Apep was commonly depicted as a serpent or a crocodile and later and a type of hybrid of the two which resembled a dragon.

Apep was occasionally described as a creature with four legs in the Book of the Dead and in earlier times was depicted as a red creature. It was the Goddess Apet and not Apep that was often depicted as a hybrid of a hippo, a croc and a lion.

www.touregypt.net...

Revelation 9:1
And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. 2 And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.
Revelation 9:11
And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon ("destruction"), but in the Greek tongue hath his name Apollyon ("Destroyer").

The use of the titles "dragon" and "destroyer" as a reference to a comet or other body (flying by or falling to earth) is in more than a few cultural and religious prophecies.

Originally posted by robinmorningstar

Originally posted by seedofchucky
creadibility + bible same sentence = oxymoron

I really get annoyed when people say things such as that above. The Bible (not talking about the Kolbrin bible which I know little about) is the number one selling text of all time, studied and reveared by societies and cultures for generations. You don't know as much as you think you do, but if you have an inkling of understanding, use it not to disrespect others faith. It's rude and obtuse, and I grow tired of the arrogance of that nature...

Nice. I will give Harry Potter a phone call this weekend. Maybe he can come and turn my turnips into fairies.

Originally posted by veryinteresting

Originally posted by Byrd

Now, as many know, I'm quite familiar with ancient Egypt and literature. There's no such item in any Egyptian (or Hebrew or Celt) tradition/legend/writing/reference. "The Destroyer" is the hippo-crocodile demon that eats the heart of liars in Egyptian references and waits for everyone in the afterlife.

Are you referencing Apep? also called Apophis? Apep was commonly depicted as a serpent or a crocodile and later and a type of hybrid of the two which resembled a dragon.

Spot on! I was talking about Apep/Apophis. However, no ancient Egyptian depiction of Apep resembles a dragon. Serpent is very clearly indicated but I've never seen a ancient depiction of Apep that looked anything like a dragon.

It was the Goddess Apet and not Apep that was often depicted as a hybrid of a hippo, a croc and a lion.

Apet's the mother goddess (hippo, yes, demon, no) and the surveyor of the sky.
www.touregypt.net...

The "devourer of the dead" was Ammit/Amut... and I'd totally drawn a blank on the name -- for some reason confusing Amut with Apep. This is what happens when I'm too lazy to doublecheck my facts! :
en.wikipedia.org...

The use of the titles "dragon" and "destroyer" as a reference to a comet or other body (flying by or falling to earth) is in more than a few cultural and religious prophecies.

Got a link? I'm feeling lazy here, but would like to read some scholarly stuff on this.

The info here should answer your question

www.thechronicleproject.org...

reply to post by robinmorningstar


You know, I read a poll a while back, cant remember who did it, but it said that atheists and agnostics were more knowledgeable when it came to the bible and religion in general than the majority of christians were. You do not come to these conclusions just by happenstance or being rebellious somehow. I would say I'm Gnostic, I don't believe in the Judeo-Christian God, but I know God exists. And most books of the bible (with the exception of a few like psalms and proverbs) are useless, distorted, writings that have been pawned off as Gods laws when they were in actuality written by men with an agenda.