dosen't the story of jesus sound like hercules??

[jordandog]

In reference to Asimov's quote, how can anyone say another person's opinion "is not true"?! That's taking it ('it' being anything that is seen as non-bible/christian support) way too far in my opinion.

Thanks jordandog!

Hey queen, waaay late on this one, but you're welcome.

[shernajwine]

I already explained you are using an improper analogy!!  I didn't say you were trying to prove Jesus, I said you are using a fallacious comparison!

It's not a fallacious comparison. If we are not talking about proving Jesus' existence then it's a completely relevant and acceptable comparison.

You said you didn't ask Jesus to die for you and he didn't stay dead so it wasn't a sacrifice. I say, I'm glad I didn't have to ask, and I don't put a condition of death on the validity of the sacrifice. Jesus is just as real to me as my husband is. I don't have to see Jesus get tortured and hung on a cross before my eyes to know that it happened. Therefore, for me it is a completely acceptable comparison.

So god's so incompetent that he couldn't manage to write a book that's easily understandable by all?

Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?

[shernajwine]

Care to take a crack at some of the inconsistencies if you think it's "perfect", then?

From http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

God created the sun and stars on the first day.  When, on the fourth day, it says 'God made two great lights', the word used for 'made' is again 'asah', which means 'appointed' (the same way we would use it in the sentence 'they made me their leader').  On the fourth day, God appointed the sun and stars to be the dividers of day and night, and for seasons and time-telling.  In the 'he made the stars also' passage, no word for 'made' really appears there (Strong's Concordance gives it the number 9999, which implies a word which is not in the original Hebrew). It's basically saying 'The stars, also'. Not a contradiction.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

Genesis 1:11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Genesis 1:27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Genesis 1 is referring to the Earth itself (the Hebrew 'Erets'), while 2:5 is referring to "the field" (the Hebrew 'Sadeh').  Sadeh is always used in the Bible to refer to a specific area.  In fact, in reading 2:5 you can see what the author was talking about - about plants that needed man's help to thrive as opposed to wild plants.  Essentially, God created wild plants, but held back on creating those that needed man's help to thrive, until man was created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

Genesis 1:20  And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. (KJV)

Genesis 2:19  And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. (KJV)

Actually, 1:20 speaks of all creatures, and 2:19 speaks of everything except sea creatures.  As science has shown us, all creatures are ultimately made up both of water and of 'ground'.  Not a contradiction.

For anyone who is actually interested in studying scripture, I suggest getting a concordance to help with the interpretation of the original language. Also the information here is from http://kingdavid8.com/Contradictions/Home.html

Additionally, searching apologetics materials can help interpretation when trying to understand the culture of the peoples being written to and about in certain passages.

Never be afraid to search out truth and don't ignore claims from people like queenofnines and other skeptics. The truth you find will only serve to strengthen your faith, seek truth always with prayer and supplication and you will find God.....because God IS truth.

[shernajwine]

<<If you've been mistakenly taught that the verses above refer to Christ's Transfiguration, read Revelation 20:12 which coincides with Matthew 16:27 in describing a Judgment Day scenario:
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened:and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Revelation 20:12

Firstly, the verse you originally quoted was not Mat 16:27 it was 16:28. 16:27 is referring to the Second Coming. 16:28 is referring to the transfiguration. Note the proximity to Mark 9:1-2

And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power. (2) And after 6 days Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.

Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass*, till all these things be fulfilled.
Matthew 24:30-34

The fig tree in this proverbial passage was a way of assuring believers that although they cannot know the specific eschatological times, they can know the general time. The fig tree put out its leaves early and everyone
knew spring was close.

24:32-33 When the last generation comes, the Bible’s prophetic passages will fit exactly the history of that day. This knowledge will strengthen the believers’ trust in God amidst end time persecution. The problem with every generation of believers is that they force the Bible into the history of their own day! All attempts have so far have been wrong!

Verse 34: This verse referred to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Roman legion under Titus. Jesus was merging the questions of 24:3: (1) the destruction of the temple, (2) the sign of His return at the end of the age, and (3) the end of the age.

http://freebiblecommentary.org/pdf/EN/VOL01.pdf

[sflynt]

him being half man half god and all. christianity seems like a big pile of stolen beliefs ofom other religons anyone agree??

No I don't agree.

[502mania]

No I don't agree.

  http://www.illuminati-news.com/origin-of-christianity.htm
Sunday from pagan Romans,

Easter from the pagan Egyptians,

Christmas from the pagan Babylonians,

the truingod from the Gnostics; immortality from the pagan Greeks,

and some from the teaching of the Messiah,

and with many other doctrines were combined,

and thus the religion of Christianity was formed, which, eventually, became the state religion of the Roman Empire.




i suggest you read the entire page, just follow the link above

[shernajwine]

No I don't agree.

 http://www.illuminati-news.com/origin-of-christianity.htm
Sunday from pagan Romans,

Easter from the pagan Egyptians,

Christmas from the pagan Babylonians,

the truingod from the Gnostics; immortality from the pagan Greeks,

and some from the teaching of the Messiah,

and with many other doctrines were combined,

and thus the religion of Christianity was formed, which, eventually, became the state religion of the Roman Empire.




i suggest you read the entire page, just follow the link above

Much of what is pagan about "Christianity" applies to the Catholic Church.

For the first 280 years of Christian history, Christianity was banned by the Roman empire, and Christians were terribly persecuted. This changed after the “conversion” of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Constantine “legalized” Christianity at the Edict of Milan in A.D. 313. Later, in A.D. 325, Constantine called together the Council of Nicea, in an attempt to unify Christianity. Constantine envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire, which at that time was beginning to fragment and divide. While this may have seemed to be a positive development for the Christian church, the results were anything but positive. Just as Constantine refused to fully embrace the Christian faith, but continued many of his pagan beliefs and practices, so the Christian church that Constantine promoted was a mixture of true Christianity and Roman paganism.

Constantine found that with the Roman Empire being so vast, expansive, and diverse – not everyone would agree to forsake their religious beliefs and instead embrace Christianity. So, Constantine allowed, and even promoted, the “Christianization” of pagan beliefs. Completely pagan and utterly unbiblical beliefs were given new “Christian” identities.

The origin of the Catholic Church is the tragic compromise of Christianity with the pagan religions that surrounded it. Instead of proclaiming the Gospel and converting the pagans, the Catholic Church “Christianized” the pagan religions, and “paganized” Christianity. By blurring the differences and erasing the distinctions, yes, the Catholic Church made itself attractive to the people of the Roman empire. One result was the Catholic Church becoming the supreme religion in the “Roman world” for centuries. However, another result was the most dominant form of Christianity apostatizing from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and the true proclamation of God’s Word.
http://www.gotquestions.org/origin-Catholic-church.html

I suggest reading the whole article, as it cites specific examples of pagan tradition integrated into the church.

[502mania]

catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness

[queenofnines]

Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?

So you're admitting he's not all-powerful?  He's god -- can't he do anything?!  Does he not write sequels?  lol

[queenofnines]

No I don't agree.

  http://www.illuminati-news.com/origin-of-christianity.htm
Sunday from pagan Romans,

Easter from the pagan Egyptians,

Christmas from the pagan Babylonians,

the truingod from the Gnostics; immortality from the pagan Greeks,

and some from the teaching of the Messiah,

and with many other doctrines were combined,

and thus the religion of Christianity was formed, which, eventually, became the state religion of the Roman Empire.

Yep.  Now watch the Xtians dance to try and rationalize all this. 

Note to Sherna -- the Catholics ARE the original Christians!

[shernajwine]

catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness

It is a sect of Christianity, there are many sects...and any that deviate from biblical teachings are false religion; whether they call themselves Christian or not. If you are really interested in figuring out who Jesus really was, what the true teachings of Christianity entail, and a better understanding of scriptures then please let me know. I have a lot of materials I can refer you to. If you are not interested and you think you have the answers, please let me know so I don't waste time trying to help you.

[shernajwine]

Please, oh competent one, explain how God would have a book written in a language that would be understood by the biblical age people and us, the people of the 21st century, and people of how many other future centuries there are ahead of us?

So you're admitting he's not all-powerful?  He's god -- can't he do anything?!  Does he not write sequels?  lol

I'm saying God did just fine with the bible we have. With such a diverse amount of language and culture in the world it has been translated in part or in whole into over 2000 languages and dialects. And it is the largest seller of ALL books published.

God can do anything. We today have the ability to interpret languages that once existed based on history. We do just fine. Why would God have people writing things in a language that didn't exist 1500 years ago?? That's an illogical argument.

Note to Sherna -- the Catholics ARE the original Christians!

No they are not. The churches in the NT were the original Christians and they didn't worship the virgin or saints, or wear beads or any other such nonsense in the Catholic church. If you bothered to read the article I posted from you would see how the Catholic church came into being and how it veered off the original apostolic churches of the NT.

[jordandog]

catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness

It is a sect of Christianity, there are many sects...and any that deviate from biblical teachings are false religion; whether they call themselves Christian or not.

I don't understand how you can say that, sherna. I saw in a post (don't ask me what thread it was, too many to keep track of right now ) you stated Jehovah's Witnesses were a 'false religion'. Who are you, or anyone, to say that just because they deviate from the exact premises set out in the bible? I'm fairly sure they would say the same thing about your's, that it was a 'false' belief/religion, and I would question that also. It is like you all want to think that you have the corner on what god wants. It would be like taking the NFL Playbook and Rules, set up by the league and followed since it started, but with a few rule changes along the way. Then because one team wants to stick with the old rules, and another wants to modify the way IT sees things, all of a sudden you have teams telling each other that THEY are NOT 'real' football teams, but 'false' ones. Before you know it, the fans (parishioners/followers) don't have a clue what is going on because it has all become one huge, confusing, and muddled mess. The thing is, the fans and the players all still want to reach the ultimate goal - a win (peace, love, truth) and if they are really good at what they do, they will get to the absolute ultimate, the Super Bowl (heaven).

That scenario may sound very silly and/or stupid, but all the back and forth on who is following the correct religion, the correct interpretation of the word of god, etc., has become just as silly to watch, in my opinion. You all say you want the same thing, but no one seems to know  or be able to agree on how to get it. That in itself causes more of an uproar than all the atheists and agnostics put together. And we don't seem hell bent on arguing which one is right or blowing each other up in 'non-religious' wars.

[Falconer02]

That is a great and hilarious metaphor. Har har har harrrrrr! If I may quote the Damned Human Race-

"Man is the Religious Animal.  He is the only Religious Ani­mal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion, several of them"

[shernajwine]

catholicism is a sect of christianity. if i'm not mistaken, they are the same ones that used to sell gods forgiveness

It is a sect of Christianity, there are many sects...and any that deviate from biblical teachings are false religion; whether they call themselves Christian or not.

I don't understand how you can say that, sherna. I saw in a post (don't ask me what thread it was, too many to keep track of right now ) you stated Jehovah's Witnesses were a 'false religion'. Who are you, or anyone, to say that just because they deviate from the exact premises set out in the bible? I'm fairly sure they would say the same thing about your's, that it was a 'false' belief/religion, and I would question that also. It is like you all want to think that you have the corner on what god wants. It would be like taking the NFL Playbook and Rules, set up by the league and followed since it started, but with a few rule changes along the way. Then because one team wants to stick with the old rules, and another wants to modify the way IT sees things, all of a sudden you have teams telling each other that THEY are NOT 'real' football teams, but 'false' ones. Before you know it, the fans (parishioners/followers) don't have a clue what is going on because it has all become one huge, confusing, and muddled mess. The thing is, the fans and the players all still want to reach the ultimate goal - a win (peace, love, truth) and if they are really good at what they do, they will get to the absolute ultimate, the Super Bowl (heaven).

That scenario may sound very silly and/or stupid, but all the back and forth on who is following the correct religion, the correct interpretation of the word of god, etc., has become just as silly to watch, in my opinion. You all say you want the same thing, but no one seems to know  or be able to agree on how to get it. That in itself causes more of an uproar than all the atheists and agnostics put together. And we don't seem hell bent on arguing which one is right or blowing each other up in 'non-religious' wars.

I see what you're trying to get at but the bible isn't meant to be changed or added to or altered (like a playbook). There are some issues with attempts at correctly interpreting the original language because language is constantly changing with every generation, words are added and words become extinct. So, interpreting the original Hebrew Aramaic and Greek to relevant current language is an ongoing mission. BUT it is not meant to CHANGE the original meaning.

Mormons, Catholics, Jehovah's Wittness, Muslims, they have all ADDED their own books in addition to bible. Not explanatory books, but books they say are "inspired" like the bible itself...this contradicts the bible they are adding to when it says:
Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

I do not have a denomination, I am Christian by definition because I believe in the deity of Christ. But I have no "sect" to which I belong. I don't claim to have a corner on what God wants (I am constantly learning new things in the scriptures). But I know what contradicts bible teachings; and those aforementioned sects and beliefs contradict the bible. Islam says that Jesus was only a prophet...well either the Koran is right or it's wrong....but Christianity and Islam can't both be right. JW say Christ is God's literal son and is inferior to God himself, the bible clearly says Jesus IS God...well either the New World Bible used by JW is right or the Holy Bible in it's many translations is right. Mormons say there is a council of Gods...the bible says there is only one God. Well they can't both be right! Catholics pray to statues and saints, the bible calls this idolatry......well since I believe the bible I'm going to have to say that a religion that teaches idolatry is false religion.

With a playbook....there is no right or wrong play, it's whatever works for that team to win. That's not how the Word of God works. It is what it is and God was very clear about the consequences of false teachings of His Word.

With so many different teachings being spread throughout the Christian church today, how can we tell true Bible doctrine from false Bible doctrine. There is one way that is the best to know truth from error. That is to be grounded in God's word the Bible. If you know what the Bible is teaching you will have a clearer view of false doctrine when it is presented to you. No matter who the person is teaching the doctrine. As the late Donald Gray Barnhouse taught in his audio message "Counterfeits" that when new bank tellers are trained, they spend weeks on end touching and handling real money. When they are well acquainted with the feel and texture of real money they know the instant a counterfeit bill hits their fingers without even looking. They know it is a counterfeit just by the feel of the paper. This is how we should know true Bible doctrine so we can tell something is false teaching the minute we hear it.

Knowing the Bible and what sound Christian doctrine is, will prepare us for defending the faith and arm us to stand up for the truth when false doctrine is presented as true Bible doctrine.

http://www.testthespirit.com/true/