The Bible has been changed ( rewritten )

Originally posted by jellyfishbrains
How about everyone take a vote on whether randyvs is an idiot?

I vote yes.

but you call yourself what?

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by SuperiorEd

 

That's all fine and dandy, but, we are talking about the Bible here, not religion. Please stay on topic and answer my post in relation to the thread. If you want to discuss religion start another thread.

We are speaking of the veracity and authenticity (Authority) of the Bible. In terms of the thread, there is no other topic. To demonstrate such a cloud of witness is to demolish the opposition in evidence. There are no legs to stand on that won't be seen as falling over. The Bible is a firm foundation.

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by jellyfishbrains
How about everyone take a vote on whether randyvs is an idiot?

I vote yes.

but you call yourself what?

Bias only builds ground for the other person to stand against you. Speak in terms of the subject and refrain from stepping on the object. Bias reveals prejudice instead of expressing character. We can only judge a person correctly on the character they demonstrate. Randyvs has demonstrated good character. His stars prove this to be true. Deference to the OP.

.

Originally posted by jellyfishbrains
How about everyone take a vote on whether randyvs is an idiot?

I vote yes.

I would not call him an idiot, perhaps severely misguided. You have to understand that people like randyvs have been conditioned to think this way. Indoctrinated in to playing along in to this great scam. But more so it does not bode well with him or those of his ilk when they have to question everything else. If you force these people too hard to awaken it can be quite traumatic for them. They have to do the work themselves and awaken on their own.

randyvs got a bit of egg on his face in this thread. He will learn hopefully that you wont find your higher power in a book or building.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

How well I know this about evil, my friend. We may choose, and then there may be an appearance of our choice. I have read Malachi, and every other book you could name. And what I find slightly offensive is you think I have not, need to be informed, do not know the science that supports. But all these are tools by which many will be turned away, as turned to.... And faith, in fact, is the apperance of what does not appear.

As to what another poster said, no, it is not he said she said. For if we are to discern what is true, we must first read and consider and over and under and sideways stand what is here, for some of it is there to inform and assist and some to lead us forever down. Yes, we must discern light from dark, for these are time defined by more occult than anything, and in the occult goodness is evil, and vice versa. And i only responded to a thread like this because the absolutes it represents are clearly meant to mislead

Sorry it messed up again ..... dont understand.

reply to post by milkyway12

So you think we are living in the end of times? why cos it say's in a book?
It's a real shame that the reason you and other's even believe in the end of time's is because "It is written" and all the worlds leader's who believe in The Bible or any other holy book will make it happen.
I have never met an atheist who preaches about the end of the world.
If we do blow ourselves up I will blame Religion and if it's mad max time's Iam gonna burn every dam religous text I can find so we have a decent chance next time around.

reply to post by boymonkey74


The Bible is known as one of the most accurate books of prophecies.

Considering , this is the only time in history where all of the prophecies are falling in line with each other.

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by jellyfishbrains
How about everyone take a vote on whether randyvs is an idiot?

I vote yes.

but you call yourself what?

Bias only builds ground for the other person to stand against you. Speak in terms of the subject and refrain from stepping on the object. Bias reveals prejudice instead of expressing character. We can only judge a person correctly on the character they demonstrate. Randyvs has demonstrated good character. His stars prove this to be true. Deference to the OP.

Ouch!

but you are right. My bit of humour against jellyfishbrains was unkind and uncalled-for.

Jellyfishbrains does NOT have the brains of a jellyfish.

Thousands of early Christian writings and lexionaries (first and second century) cite verses from the New Testament. In fact, it is nearly possible to put together the entire New Testament just from early Christian writings. For example, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 A.D.) cites verses from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. The letters of Ignatius (dated 115 A.D.) were written to several churches in Asia Minor and cites verses from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. These letters indicate that the entire New Testament was written in the first century A.D. In addition, there is internal evidence for a first century date for the writing of the New Testament. The book of Acts ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial (Acts 28:30-31 (1)). It is likely that Luke wrote Acts during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that Acts and Luke were written within thirty years of ministry and death of Jesus. Another internal evidence is that there is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Although Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus' prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation (Matthew 24:1-2 (2),Mark 13:1-2 (3), Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32(4)), no New Testament book refers to this event as having happened. If they had been written after 70 A.D., it is likely that letters written after 70 A.D. would have mentioned the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist, "In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D."

With all of the massive manuscript evidence you would think there would be massive discrepancies - just the opposite is true. New Testament manuscripts agree in 99.5% (5) of the text (compared to only 95% for the Iliad). Most of the discrepancies are in spelling and word order. A few words have been changed or added. There are two passages that are disputed but no discrepancy is of any doctrinal significance (i.e., none would alter basic Christian doctrine). Most Bibles include the options as footnotes when there are discrepancies. How could there be such accuracy over a period of 1,400 years of copying? Two reasons: The scribes that did the copying had meticulous methods for checking their copies for errors. 2) The Holy Spirit made sure we would have an accurate copy of God's word so we would not be deceived. The Mormons, theological liberals as well as other cults and false religions such as Islam that claim the Bible has been tampered with are completely proven false by the extensive, historical manuscript evidence.

I have not read all of the material here but I do agree with some which opine that the the bibles of the Hebrews and of the Greeks into the English language have not been honest in their presentation to the readers. Honest people will tell the truth and stay with that truth. There should be no need for translation after translation of the same language except in the event for correction or additional material. These corrections and additions should then be appended in a separate attached work.

This is one of the reasons that Christianity has lost so much of its authority with the modern cultures. Even when it become obvious that a church doctrine is false the lie will continue to be ignored by the church. This is absolutely unacceptable with the more educated people of today and one of the main reasons for churches closing their doors all over the world.

An example of false doctrine is as follows and has been taught for hundreds of years in order to embrace the heathens and increase the church numbers. This is from my book "Resurrection" --

" Another false teaching is that of Easter. Some of the organized religions insist upon a Good Friday as the crucifixion day and Sunday as the resurrection day. This teaches that there was one day and two nights involved in Jesus’ death and resurrection story. Common sense tells us that some one is very wrong in this teaching. Let’s look at the facts.
Jesus’ tomb was sealed three days and three nights according to Matthew 12:40. The start of a day was the evening just after sunset (6:01 pm) and ended the following day just before sunset (6:00 pm). Jesus was murdered on Wednesday and entombed before the sunset (6:00 PM) of Wednesday. His tomb was opened on early Sunday morning. A day was counted from sunset to sunset. Twelve hours of Thursday night and Twelve hours of Thursday daylight are one 24 hour day. Twelve hours of Friday night and twelve hours of Friday daylight are another 24 hour day. Twelve hours of Saturday night and twelve hours of Saturday daylight are another 24 hours. This adds to three days and three nights.
Jesus was put to death on Wednesday afternoon at about three o’clock. He was entombed by sunset before the start of Thursday. This Thursday was after the Wednesday Passover and was regarded as a High Sabbath. The High Sabbath was revered equal to that of a Saturday Sabbath. We see this in (Mark 15:42, Luke 23:52-54, & John 19:31).
According to the Law of Torah, the day following Passover, which is also the first day of the feast of unleavened bread, is also, always a Sabbath day of rest to be observed like the 7th day weekly Sabbath no matter what day of the week it falls on. You can see this in Leviticus 23:4-8, Numbers 28:16-18, and John 19:31. Therefore the High Sabbath of Thursday was not the same as the Saturday Sabbath which followed on the third day after the crucifixion. Luke 23:55, 56 states that the women, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James went and prepared anointing spices and oils before the Sabbath. Mark 16:1 states that they bought them after the Sabbath! There is no conflict when you understand that this references two different Sabbaths.
Actually both of the women bought the spices on the same day which was Friday. Friday was the day after the Sabbath and the day before the Sabbath. When Mark says they bought the spices after the Sabbath, the Sabbath he is referring to was the High Day Thursday Sabbath which was the first day of unleavened bread that followed the day of Passover. When Luke says they prepared the spices and then rested the Sabbath, the Sabbath he is referring to is Saturday which was the regular weekly Sabbath.
A last word which confirms what we have just learned can be verified by anyone who will look in a Greek Interlinear translation or Greek Lexicon. Turn to Matthew 28:1 and this will verify that it reads “after the Sabbaths (plural) as the first day of the week began to dawn..." Most bibles translate this as singular “Sabbath” because of the teachings of the church. "

reply to post by SuperiorEd


I bow to you, superior Ed, as I am superior to none. However, I take exception with what you say here. There are bibles and then there are bibles. Even in this thread, this was addressed, the many versions. To ignore this, is to ignore the subtleties which are obfuscated in which to turn what was intended to be our guide into something else entirely. If one does not see this, by the subsequent reprinting and recasting according to religion, history and times, then one cannot hope to persevere in faith. And insulting those who would address these differenes, only undermines the faith you, and Randy seem to want to put forth. Denying the obvious destroys the validity of what you love and adhere to. Judging the rest of us who do not deny that obvious, and do not insult anyone for the recognition of it but try to cognify it while others are busy calling us failures and subtly telling us to read more, when we've read more than them, and Still, have our faith,but may inform it from slightly different perpectives is to destroy faith, altogether.

reply to post by Seede


If you would take a minute to read this instead of skipping OVER It , it PROVES the BIBLE is a reliable SOURCE.

Thousands of early Christian writings and lexionaries (first and second century) cite verses from the New Testament. In fact, it is nearly possible to put together the entire New Testament just from early Christian writings. For example, the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians (dated 95 A.D.) cites verses from the Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, Hebrews, and 1 Peter. The letters of Ignatius (dated 115 A.D.) were written to several churches in Asia Minor and cites verses from Matthew, John, Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. These letters indicate that the entire New Testament was written in the first century A.D. In addition, there is internal evidence for a first century date for the writing of the New Testament. The book of Acts ends abruptly with Paul in prison, awaiting trial (Acts 28:30-31 (1)). It is likely that Luke wrote Acts during this time, before Paul finally appeared before Nero. This would be about 62-63 A.D., meaning that Acts and Luke were written within thirty years of ministry and death of Jesus. Another internal evidence is that there is no mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Although Matthew, Mark and Luke record Jesus' prophecy that the temple and city would be destroyed within that generation (Matthew 24:1-2 (2),Mark 13:1-2 (3), Luke 21:5-9,20-24,32(4)), no New Testament book refers to this event as having happened. If they had been written after 70 A.D., it is likely that letters written after 70 A.D. would have mentioned the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy. As stated by Nelson Glueck, former president of the Jewish Theological Seminary in the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, and renowned Jewish archaeologist, "In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written between the forties and eighties of the first century A.D."

With all of the massive manuscript evidence you would think there would be massive discrepancies - just the opposite is true. New Testament manuscripts agree in 99.5% (5) of the text (compared to only 95% for the Iliad). Most of the discrepancies are in spelling and word order. A few words have been changed or added. There are two passages that are disputed but no discrepancy is of any doctrinal significance (i.e., none would alter basic Christian doctrine). Most Bibles include the options as footnotes when there are discrepancies. How could there be such accuracy over a period of 1,400 years of copying? Two reasons: The scribes that did the copying had meticulous methods for checking their copies for errors. 2) The Holy Spirit made sure we would have an accurate copy of God's word so we would not be deceived. The Mormons, theological liberals as well as other cults and false religions such as Islam that claim the Bible has been tampered with are completely proven false by the extensive, historical manuscript evidence.



By the way , as soon as JESUS died , the Old Testament commandments was nulled with the crack through the temple.

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

The Bible is known as one of the most accurate books of prophecies.

Considering , this is the only time in history where all of the prophecies are falling in line with each other.

edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)

edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)

Do you have a set of examples?

If so could said examples be orchestrated by mere men to establish a reinforcement of faith?

Hey, but thanks for telling me god loves me. There's a way to tell someone that without assuming you have a more direct and deserving line with god than they do, and they just need to hear it, because obviously what they are saying proves they doubt that and are mad at him. But this, rather than comforting, is belittling. And if those of you who purport to be "true Christians" and demonstrate the faith he asks of us, you would not approach others of us who seek to inform of hidden history to save the faith of those who have been turned away by such nonsensical absolutes that will be used to lead some into eternal loss of soul.

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

Originally posted by chr0naut

Originally posted by jellyfishbrains
How about everyone take a vote on whether randyvs is an idiot?

I vote yes.

but you call yourself what?

Bias only builds ground for the other person to stand against you. Speak in terms of the subject and refrain from stepping on the object. Bias reveals prejudice instead of expressing character. We can only judge a person correctly on the character they demonstrate. Randyvs has demonstrated good character. His stars prove this to be true. Deference to the OP.

Ouch!

but you are right. My bit of humour against jellyfishbrains was unkind and uncalled-for.

Jellyfishbrains does NOT have the brains of a jellyfish.

Well now this is something new isn't it ?

Headline on ATS should read :

Idiot makes front page !

Pauly girl

You are correct Madam it is Voila ! At least I was close ?

Originally posted by Unknown Soldier

Originally posted by jellyfishbrains
How about everyone take a vote on whether randyvs is an idiot?

I vote yes.

I would not call him an idiot, perhaps severely misguided. You have to understand that people like randyvs have been conditioned to think this way. Indoctrinated in to playing along in to this great scam. But more so it does not bode well with him or those of his ilk when they have to question everything else. If you force these people too hard to awaken it can be quite traumatic for them. They have to do the work themselves and awaken on their own.

randyvs got a bit of egg on his face in this thread. He will learn hopefully that you wont find your higher power in a book or building.

edit on 27-11-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)

Quite the opposite is true. If you read back, the OP is substantiated on the level of physics, common sense and historical evidence. The original video posted has enough in it to demonstrate this handily. The myth is seeing the image of energy in reality as accident. To say that God is not the designer, expressed best by the Bible, then we are missing any evidence against.

Consciousness is evident in the changed states of matter. To suggest that matter originates conscious goes against what we know from science and simple common sense. This is your starting point to determine the myth from fact. No only does the Bible support this, so does Rumi the Sufi, the Corpus Hermeticum, Buddha, Lou Tau, and a countless barge of other sources.

Augustine, from City of God
"And yet the validity of logical sequences is not a thing devised by men, but is observed and noted by them that they may be able to learn and teach it; for it exists eternally in the reason of things, and has its origin with God. For as the man who narrates the order of events does not himself create that order; and as he who describes the situations of places, or the natures of animals, or roots, or minerals, does not describe arrangements of man; and as he who points out the stars and their movements does not point out anything that he himself or any other man has ordained;—in the same way, he who says, “When the consequent is false, the antecedent must also be false,” says what is most true; but he does not himself make it so, he only points out that it is so."

reply to post by Unknown Soldier


The HOLY Spirit works through men. I guess you havnt read the Bible very much. So it doesnt matter how uneducated the man is or educated. God can use him.


Perhaps the greatest and most obvious testimony to the accuracy of Biblical prophecy is provided by the people and nation of Israel. The Jews went without a homeland for 1900 years, just as God had promised numerous times in the Old Testament, as a reluctant judgment on His rebellious chosen people. Moses warned Israel that if they corrupted themselves, then "the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other (Deut 28:64, KJV)". Remarkably, this century God restored the Jews to their ancient homeland, fulfilling many other specific Old Testament prophesies3.


This was written 2500 years ago, and also consider that this was written at a time when Jerusalem was in complete ruins:

Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it... For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle (Zech 12:2-3, Zech 14:2-3 KJV)."

"All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: 'He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him (Ps 22:7-8)"
"But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed (Isa 53:5)"
"Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me (Ps 41:9)."
"They have pierced my hands and my feet (Ps 22:16)."
"Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors (Isa 53:12)."
"They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son (Zech 12:10)."


The Old Testament contains 333 prophesies regarding the Messiah, most of which were fulfilled by the first coming of Jesus Christ. Even the most liberal critics acknowledge that these prophesies were written at least 400 years before Christ. Mathematicians have easily shown that the odds of all these prophesies being fulfilled by chance in one man is greater than the number of atoms in the universe many times over.


The Bible contains over 2000 prophesies that have been fulfilled, many with very specific details. One must ask himself why he would remain skeptical in light of this incontrovertible evidence. It would seem that if someone was honestly seeking the truth, it would certainly be a worthwhile effort to to at least investigate a handful of these prophesies. Psalm 22 would be a good start - it contains several prophesies describing Christ's crucifixion, a method of execution that wasn't invented until several centuries after King David wrote about it. A Bible and an encyclopedia is all one would need to verify the prophetic accuracy of Psalm 22.






There you go , 2000 prophecies for you look up.

reply to post by SuperiorEd

We are speaking of the veracity and authenticity (Authority) of the Bible. In terms of the thread, there is no other topic. To demonstrate such a cloud of witness is to demolish the opposition in evidence. There are no legs to stand on that won't be seen as falling over. The Bible is a firm foundation.

No reason to overspeak. We are talking about whether the Bible has been re-written. Talking about Religion is one thing, whether the Bible is re-written/wrongly translated is another.