- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,014
- 52,623
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Since we've scoured the earth and found nothing, where do you propose we look next?
And God has never spoken to anyone since?Not audibly.Ah. Telepathecally.No --- telepathy is brain-to-brain --- this is heart-to-heart.
So, where, if anywhere, does the brain fit into the equation?
Yes, I am aware of that.
Matthew, for instance, quotes heavily from OT Scriptures.
I disagree however with your words "were motivated". That speaks of deception.
No, I'm not. These meetings were not held to determine what was the Word of God:
The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council [ Council of Trent ].
If a book was written by inspiration, it became canonical the minute it was completed.
All of the books of the OT were quoted in the NT, except for Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon --- none of the books of the Apocrypha, however, are mentioned.
The NT books had to pass a threefold test: a) either be written, or backed, by an Apostle (Peter backed Mark, and Luke backed Paul); b) they had to be circulated and accepted by the majority of the NT churches; and c) they had to be in agreement with each other, and the OT. By the 2nd century AD, only the 27 books of the NT had met this criteria.
Peter, in 2 Peter 3:16, referred to the letters of Paul as "Scripture", without waiting for some church council to be held.
Without going to that site, I'm sure they're the garden variety dime-a-dozen cheap shots.
bbl
p.s. Saul was rejected as king.
You mean the same Jews that look at the Gospels of Jesus Christ and say "Nope, that didn't happen"?
A name, AV. Give a name, if you can.
Written by one man after what fact? How do you know that the word of God couldn't be written by just one man? Why would anyone have to write their destiny ahead of time and where to you get the idea that the Qur'an, which was written in the 7th century, doesn't write destiny ahead of time?Are we going to keep repeating ourselves, Beastt?
Let's go through it again:
How do I know it's not the Qur'an?
Simple --- the Qur'an was written by one man --- after the fact. The Arabs, who were already in existence, did not write their destiny ahead of time.
Who told you that? Where has it been conclusively demonstrated that automatic writing is of the occult? Did you not notice what it said in what you pasted from Wikipedia? "Oahspe: A Kosmon Bible in the Words of Jehovih and his Angel Embassadors (sic) is a book announcing new revelations from God, which was produced by John Ballou Newbrough..."How do I know it's not the Oahspe?
Inspiration ended in 96 AD --- and automatic writing is of the occult.
Again, you're basing your entire objection on assumptions which have no basis in truth and no level of demonstrable validity. It amounts to; "I believe the Bible and the Bible says..."How do I know it's not the Book of Mormon?
The Book of Mormon was written by one man after 96 AD., and that one man claims he was a prophet and, of course, there are no more prophets after 96 AD.
So...? Where has it ever been established that the word of God has to have been written over a period of 1500 years? Can you demonstrate that God would only present his word through 40+ authors chosen not by God, but by men? There were far more than your 40+ authors writing "scripture". That which was selected to be included in the Bible was chosen by men, not by God.How do I know it's the Bible?
The Bible was written over a period of 1500 years, and not confined to just the lifetime of one man. It has 40+ authors, from a variety of backgrounds and occupations, from three different continents, in three different languages.
You continue to make this assertion but the very topic of this thread demonstrates conclusively that this isn't true. There was never a global flood. The Bible says there was. The Bible is wrong. Why would the "word of God" be wrong about something like that? Why wouldn't God know that Earth moves through space? Why wouldn't God know that the Earth didn't form before the sun? Why wouldn't God know that whales and other marine animals would be unable to survive a global flood. The Bible always makes references to "dry land" or the "ground" when it talks about everything that died. But it completely ignores things like whales, which couldn't have survived such a flood and couldn't have been aboard the Ark.Thus the potential to discredit the Bible was very high (in fact, it carries the highest potential of incredibility of any book ever written), yet each part fits like a hand in a glove.
No they're not. That point too has been made on this thread and you simply close your eyes to it and continue with your disproven chant. Jesus hasn't returned and he isn't going to. That is but one, (though the most important), prophecy which hasn't been fulfilled and isn't going to be.Embedded in its text are hundreds of prophecies (history written in advance), and fulfilled with a 100% rate of accuracy.
I don't have to because I keep showing you that it's not true.Now how do you suppose that is?
The fact that the Isaiah prophecies don't specify a virgin birth (parthenogenesis) per se, but Matthew shoe-horns it into this mistranslation is perhaps minor, but this book is apparently unique and without error.
thaumaturgy said:If, as I have asked before, the Bible doesn't say what it says, then what possible good can come from even readingit?
thaumaturgy said:God's word, if shrouded, is of no actual value. If you have to shroud the meaning in something such that it says what it doesn't say and doesn't say what it does, then it is worse than a regular book, but a source of error.
That is the worst dictionary I have ever seen.From Easton's Bible Dictionary:
The Pharaoh of the Exodus was probably Menephtah I., the fourteenth and eldest surviving son of Rameses II. He resided at Zoan, where he had the various interviews with Moses and Aaron recorded in the book of Exodus. His mummy was not among those found at Deir el-Bahari. It is still a question, however, whether Seti II. or his father Menephtah was the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Some think the balance of evidence to be in favour of the former, whose reign it is known began peacefully, but came to a sudden and disastrous end. The "Harris papyrus," found at Medinet-Abou in Upper Egypt in 1856, a state document written by Rameses III., the second king of the Twentieth Dynasty, gives at length an account of a great exodus from Egypt, followed by wide-spread confusion and anarchy. This, there is great reason to believe, was the Hebrew exodus, with which the Nineteenth Dynasty of the Pharaohs came to an end. This period of anarchy was brought to a close by Setnekht, the founder of the Twentieth Dynasty.
Hearts are muscle. They can't hear, receive verbal messages or convey verbal messages. When you talk about "the Heart" in the manner you've referenced, you're simply referring to emotions. And emotions come from the brain, not the heart.In learning the difference between mental telepathy and inspiration.
They would have wanted their writings to be accepted by an audience that accepted these scriptures. Of course they were motivated to make them fit.
So...? Where has it ever been established that the word of God has to have been written over a period of 1500 years? Can you demonstrate that God would only present his word through 40+ authors chosen not by God, but by men? There were far more than your 40+ authors writing "scripture". That which was selected to be included in the Bible was chosen by men, not by God.
That is the worst dictionary I have ever seen.
So you are showing ZERO interest in historical accuracy and an interest in only what you can pull out of the text?Good deal --- we'll just stick to what the Bible says then: "Pharaoh".
End of sentence.
Not.Flood, literal or not?
Greek, Roman and Mesopotamian cultures all have legends about a great flood, all decend from the same Black Sea pre-cursors, and it is widely accepted that flood stories are thousands of years worth of retelling in verbal tradition of the story of the Black Sea inundation eventIf you're claiming that the flood took place only in the Bible
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?