God Says Scripture Is Not Of Any Private Interpretation!!

[AV1611VET]

They problem with this attitude is that many make totally different interpretations than others do, and yet they all scream and yell that their one version is the correct one. And some of them almost sound insane. How does one prove his version to be the correct one?

Sub, I understand where you're coming from.

I really do.

Lack of total agreement is a bummer.

Especially when we're supposed to be being guided by the Holy Spirit.

But that's no reason to carry an atheist card.

Especially since ... despite our (we Christians) many differences ... every Christian ever born, alive today, or ever will live believes IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

That's 100% agreement, chief.

Join us.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sub, I understand where you're coming from.

I really do.

Lack of total agreement is a bummer.

Especially when we're supposed to be being guided by the Holy Spirit.

But that's no reason to carry an atheist card.

Especially since ... despite our (we Christians) many differences ... every Christian ever born, alive today, or ever will live believes IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

That's 100% agreement, chief.

Join us.

The problem is that there is so much in the Bible that is clearly wrong. And that answer was a dodge, a tacit way of admitting a huge problem, if not quite an admission that one was wrong.

 

[pitabread]

Especially since ... despite our (we Christians) many differences ... every Christian ever born, alive today, or ever will live believes IN THE BEGINNING, GOD.

That's 100% agreement, chief.

Except that y'all can't agree on who is a Christian.

 

[Colter]

So who was Job talking about when he said ...

Job 19:25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

God, the redeemer.

• Isaiah 47:4
  Our Redeemer—the Lord Almighty is his name— is the Holy One of Israel.
  
  
• Psalm 78:35
  They remembered that God was their Rock, that God Most High was their Redeemer.
  
  
• Job 19:25
  I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth.
  

 

[AV1611VET]

God, the redeemer.

Then don't expect me to believe Job was the "kind of [Old Testament writer] who would reject the Gospel."

 

[Colter]

Then don't expect me to believe Job was the "kind of [Old Testament writer] who would reject the Gospel."

I don’t, never sad that. In Babylon, those scriptures which were already in existence were tampered with, reworked, exaggerated. The secular books in exestence were destroyed.

 

[AV1611VET]

In Babylon, those scriptures which were already in existence were tampered with, reworked, exaggerated. The secular books in exestence were destroyed.

Why did you do that?

 

[Colter]

Why did you do that?

The people who killed Jesus did that. You are incapable of facing the fact that the men of religion aren’t perfect. So it’s belligerent denial till the bitter end.

 

[AV1611VET]

The people who killed Jesus did that.

I find it very hard to believe that a society of misfits could locate and eradicate all secular writings and replace them with their own version of what went on ... all within a single generation.

The activity alone should arouse suspicion.

Can you imagine a society of misfits today going around and looking for every secular writing on Thomas Edison, destroying them, then replacing them with someone else?

Going to the library, going house-to-house, going through the schools, the stores, the nursing homes, and even the outhouses, looking for any writings whatsoever on Thomas Edison ... while the people not only comply with them, but accept their replacement!?

I don't think so.

Only academia would try and pass that on us.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Word but a ghost without form or material substance is yet spirit of the word unseen unheard holy ghost the LLORD of hosts third person of the trinity and is consistent to the duality primary binary and is with next to the alpha integer set zero and first of order beta and is eternal fundamental for without it no word of exsistance and the secondary binary duality integer ring would not exsist the alpha and Omega integer ring first and last of the eternal chain loop together self exsistant the duality binary to set are the trinity singularity and the crown of the word made flesh of the abelian ring theory group binary ring link how fitting for the word the trinity of his soul name centered of his brow alpha first is now set integer zero like a neutron in the house the body was prepared the father son and Holy Ghost invisible unheard the great unknown God is revealed and is become both God creator friend and brother father kinsman REDEAMER Lord and savior member prepared for the slaughter sacrificial lamb without spot or blemish selfless love taste of death SINLESS Rightious blood could suffice forgive cleans covered by the blood life is in the blood the way the truth and the life only life can cover death SINLESS death it's sting had no venom death has no hold

 

[Colter]

I find it very hard to believe that a society of misfits could locate and eradicate all secular writings and replace them with their own version of what went on ... all within a single generation.

The activity alone should arouse suspicion.

Can you imagine a society of misfits today going around and looking for every secular writing on Thomas Edison, destroying them, then replacing them with someone else?

Going to the library, going house-to-house, going through the schools, the stores, the nursing homes, and even the outhouses, looking for any writings whatsoever on Thomas Edison ... while the people not only comply with them, but accept their replacement!?

I don't think so.

Only academia would try and pass that on us.

Those secular books, which were few in that age, are mentioned within the scripture that survived but those books vanished. Besides, you believe the flood story which is far more difficult, impossible really.

 

[AV1611VET]

Those secular books, which were few in that age, are mentioned within the scripture that survived but those books vanished.

Those books were to be painstakingly copied and recopied.

Are you saying someone just walked into a scribe's office, took the book he was copying, took the parchment he was writing on, and walked out?

Then came back later with a fake book and told the scribe to, "Get to work on this."

Is that what you want us to believe?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Those books were to be painstakingly copied and recopied.

Are you saying someone just walked into a scribe's office, took the book he was copying, took the parchment he was writing on, and walked out?

Then came back later with a fake book and told the scribe to, "Get to work on this."

Is that what you want us to believe?

The early Catholic Church did "purge the records" a bit. There were gnostic Gospels and other works that were declared to be false teachings and they were actively suppressed. And who knows what happened with the Old Testament when we have little to no record at all of how it was written. Modern scholars put a much younger date on it in general than literalists do. There is too much evidence that much of the writings were influenced by the Babylonian captivity. That means the oldest books of the Bible were likely written around 2500 to 2600 years ago. All that they have that are older than that are some prayer fragments that look like they might have appeared in older works. Tell me, why can't we find older evidence of the Old Testament?

 

[AV1611VET]

The early Catholic Church did "purge the records" a bit.

That's not what I'm talking about.

I'm addressing the poster who called them:

The kind of men who wrote the Old Testament ...

Then later, called them:

The people who killed Jesus ...

So I assume he's referring to the Jews.

The early Catholic Church didn't exist yet.

More specifically, I'm addressing the point that all verbal plenary records, along with their copies, along with any secular references were purged in some kind of Fahrenheit 451 scenario; then replaced with fake, mythical fables, and all done within the space of a single generation, while those who were alive at the time were alive at the time.

So not only would they have had to have purged any true stories and replaced them with fables, they would have had to have killed any eyewitnesses.

And all done without drawing any suspicion on themselves.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tell me, why can't we find older evidence of the Old Testament?

Because their molecules detached and separated over time?

How many times have you had to buy a new Bible in your lifetime because you "used up" the old One?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's not what I'm talking about.

I'm addressing the poster who called them:


Then later, called them:

So I assume he's referring to the Jews.

The early Catholic Church didn't exist yet.

More specifically, I'm addressing the point that all verbal plenary records, along with their copies, along with any secular references were purged in some kind of Fahrenheit 451 scenario; then replaced with fake, mythical fables, and all done within the space of a single generation, while those who were alive at the time were alive at the time.

So not only would they have had to have purged any true stories and replaced them with fables, they would have had to have killed any eyewitnesses.

And all done without drawing any suspicion on themselves.

But even so, the evidence tells us that the Old Testament dates largely from about 500 to 600 BC.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because their molecules detached and separated over time?

How many times have you had to buy a new Bible in your lifetime because you "used up" the old One?

Never. And there were various ways of preserving scriptures yet they are not found. Do you think that people at that time pulled out the Torah and pored (poured?) again and again? I don't think your analogy holds water.

 

[Steve Petersen]

But even so, the evidence tells us that the Old Testament dates largely from about 500 to 600 BC.

So far, the only archaeologically confirmed personages in the OT start about the 11th century BC.

 

[AV1611VET]

But even so, the evidence tells us that the Old Testament dates largely from about 500 to 600 BC.

What evidence specifically?

Just give me one piece of evidence.

I'm sure it didn't come with a timestamp.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What evidence specifically?

Just give me one piece of evidence.

I'm sure it didn't come with a timestamp.

I am far from being an expert in the field but it appears that dates of the Bible are determined largely by writing styles including specific forms of words that were used. And those can be dated by comparing writings of known dates that use the same forms. As you know, languages do change with time. That appears to be how they get the dates mentioned here:

Old Testament - Wikipedia

Now an older shard of pottery has been found with verses similar to Bible verses but no identical to any of them. It may push the date back a bit but it is rather doubtful if you would call this "The Old Testament" since it may be significantly different from what we call the Old Testament today:

Bible Possibly Written Centuries Earlier, Text Suggests

Would you accept a significantly different book as being the "Old Testament"?