Tell me about Hell

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 10, 2011

GrayAngel said:
Under normal circumstances, we can't perform magic. No matter how many times you throw a staff to the ground, it won't turn into a snake. However, there are spirits with supernatural power to do such things. These include demons, angels, and God. Witchcraft is Satanic, and it's supplied by evil spirits.

In modern day society, I wouldn't expect to see any genuine witchcraft. First of all, even in Biblical days, real magic was far from common. Second, when demons do act, just as with God, we count it as coincidence. But I think there's also been a shift in strategy.

In the Old Testament, demons allowed people to perform miracles so they could give credit to false gods. Today, religion spreads quite well enough on its own, and devil is more concerned with laying low and staying off the radar. Widespread skepticism is their current weapon of choice.

You're speculating. Real magic isn't common at all. If it were, we would be able to test it in a lab and prove it is real. I'm not talking about the kind of cheap tricks performed by Penn and Teller or Paul Daniels. I'm talking about turning sticks into snakes and other such nonsense. The Egyptians were a literate people; they would have recorded how to do such things and/or passed them down to their children. In other words, we would still have knowledge of such practices today if they were in any way real. But they're not.

So why did these stories get written in the Bible? Simple. People in those days were incredibly superstitious and would believe anything a "priest" told them. A magician turning sticks into snakes just doesn't happen in the real world, but it makes for a good story. Look at all the miracles God supposedly did during Israel's wilderness years; are you telling me that magic and miracles were so common in those days that Israel would worship any God at the drop of a hat? According to the Bible they did, but again, they're just stories. Such things and turning water in blood, sticks into snakes, making a plague of frogs, etc, do not happen in the real world. If they did then we would be living in chaos in our modern times because people would be doing magic all the time. Think about it. Everyone would turn to magic if it could be practised as liberally as the Old Testament would have us believe. Therefore I have to discard all the supernatural tales from the Bible as superstition, myth and stories to tell children to keep them believing in God.

golgotha61 · Sep 10, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
You're speculating. Real magic isn't common at all. If it were, we would be able to test it in a lab and prove it is real. I'm not talking about the kind of cheap tricks performed by Penn and Teller or Paul Daniels. I'm talking about turning sticks into snakes and other such nonsense. The Egyptians were a literate people; they would have recorded how to do such things and/or passed them down to their children. In other words, we would still have knowledge of such practices today if they were in any way real. But they're not.

The records of the ancient Egyptian building techniques still have not been fully uncovered let alone their magic trades. The occupiers of the pyramids were forgotten for centuries, let alone the secrets of their sciences. None of the secrets of these pyramid's construction was passed down to anyone, it was the archeologists that have solved some of those mysteries and we still don't full understanding of the Egyptian sciences.

So why did these stories get written in the Bible? Simple. People in those days were incredibly superstitious and would believe anything a "priest" told them. A magician turning sticks into snakes just doesn't happen in the real world, but it makes for a good story. Look at all the miracles God supposedly did during Israel's wilderness years; are you telling me that magic and miracles were so common in those days that Israel would worship any God at the drop of a hat? According to the Bible they did, but again, they're just stories. Such things and turning water in blood, sticks into snakes, making a plague of frogs, etc, do not happen in the real world. If they did then we would be living in chaos in our modern times because people would be doing magic all the time. Think about it. Everyone would turn to magic if it could be practised as liberally as the Old Testament would have us believe. Therefore I have to discard all the supernatural tales from the Bible as superstition, myth and stories to tell children to keep them believing in God.

The Bible is wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error of fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than is its witness to God’s saving grace in individual lives. This means that all the narrative historical accounts of the Bible are without error and truthful.

GrayAngel · Sep 11, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
You're speculating. Real magic isn't common at all. If it were, we would be able to test it in a lab and prove it is real. I'm not talking about the kind of cheap tricks performed by Penn and Teller or Paul Daniels. I'm talking about turning sticks into snakes and other such nonsense. The Egyptians were a literate people; they would have recorded how to do such things and/or passed them down to their children. In other words, we would still have knowledge of such practices today if they were in any way real. But they're not.

The plagues were not magic, they were miracles. There's a difference. Even in the Old Testament, magic was not very common. I can think of only a handful of cases when magicians are mentioned, and some of them don't even do all that much.

Besides, the Bible never says explicitly that magic is real, so you could choose to disregard it if you want. The miracles performed by God, however, were very real.

Grumpy Old Man said:
So why did these stories get written in the Bible? Simple. People in those days were incredibly superstitious and would believe anything a "priest" told them. A magician turning sticks into snakes just doesn't happen in the real world, but it makes for a good story. Look at all the miracles God supposedly did during Israel's wilderness years; are you telling me that magic and miracles were so common in those days that Israel would worship any God at the drop of a hat? According to the Bible they did, but again, they're just stories. Such things and turning water in blood, sticks into snakes, making a plague of frogs, etc, do not happen in the real world. If they did then we would be living in chaos in our modern times because people would be doing magic all the time. Think about it. Everyone would turn to magic if it could be practised as liberally as the Old Testament would have us believe. Therefore I have to discard all the supernatural tales from the Bible as superstition, myth and stories to tell children to keep them believing in God.

People are, and always have been, superstitious. In fact, some studies suggest that people who follow traditional, structured religions are less superstitious than people who choose not to associate with any single religion.

In those days, if you presented yourself as a prophet, and your predictions did not come true, you would be killed. They did not like false teaching, and they did not tolerate fakers.

Also, the Old Testament says many times that no one should add or take away from scripture, yet more continued to build on it. They had to have been very confident and very successful to get their works accepted.

razeontherock · Sep 11, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
Such things a making a plague of frogs, etc, do not happen in the real world. If they did then we would be living in chaos in our modern times because people would be doing magic all the time. Think about it. Everyone would turn to magic if it could be practised as liberally as the Old Testament would have us believe.

1) There is nothing about the OT that makes any of this a "liberal " occurrence. That is your false imposition onto the text. (Same holds true for God appearing, revealing, or any sort of Spiritual encounter)

2) There are scientific explanations for the entirety of the 10 plagues of Egypt, with the exception of the last, the killing of the first born. A link here would be good, but maybe somebody else here can provide?

GA777 · Sep 11, 2011

Magic is recorded and is used by wiccans now in wiccans books.And magic cant be tested in a lab,it is not humans who prove its existance,but dark forces.And the new rule of Satan since 1700s is not to show any evidence of his existance,so people dont run to God and start believing,because when people dont believe in God,they wont pray for him and therefore Satan will be in dominance of humans,because they dont have any protection against him.
And there are lots and lots of historical facts present in the bible.If it was just a myth book,why would they include facts in it?
It's not a normal book,but made of 66 different ones which all fit well.
How can its prophecies come true if people were superstitious,and not inspired by God?

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

golgotha61 said:
The records of the ancient Egyptian building techniques still have not been fully uncovered let alone their magic trades. The occupiers of the pyramids were forgotten for centuries, let alone the secrets of their sciences. None of the secrets of these pyramid's construction was passed down to anyone, it was the archeologists that have solved some of those mysteries and we still don't full understanding of the Egyptian sciences.

The Bible is wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error of fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God’s acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than is its witness to God’s saving grace in individual lives. This means that all the narrative historical accounts of the Bible are without error and truthful.

A few Biblical errors:

Ezra 2:5 (KJV): The children of Arah, seven hundred seventy and five.
Nehemiah 7:10 (KJV): The children of Arah, six hundred fifty and two.

2 Samuel 17:25 (KJV): And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother.
1 Chronicles 2:17 (KJV): And Abigail bare Amasa: and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmeelite.

Mark 2
Jesus Is Lord of the Sabbath

23 One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. 24 The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?” 25 He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? 26 In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

1 Samuel
David at Nob

1 David went to Nob, to Ahimelek the priest. Ahimelek trembled when he met him, and asked, “Why are you alone? Why is no one with you?” 2 David answered Ahimelek the priest, “The king sent me on a mission and said to me, ‘No one is to know anything about the mission I am sending you on.’ As for my men, I have told them to meet me at a certain place. 3 Now then, what do you have on hand? Give me five loaves of bread, or whatever you can find.”

4 But the priest answered David, “I don’t have any ordinary bread on hand; however, there is some consecrated bread here—provided the men have kept themselves from women.”

5 David replied, “Indeed women have been kept from us, as usual whenever I set out. The men’s bodies are holy even on missions that are not holy. How much more so today!” 6 So the priest gave him the consecrated bread, since there was no bread there except the bread of the Presence that had been removed from before the LORD and replaced by hot bread on the day it was taken away.

7 Now one of Saul’s servants was there that day, detained before the LORD; he was Doeg the Edomite, Saul’s chief shepherd. 8 David asked Ahimelek, “Don’t you have a spear or a sword here? I haven’t brought my sword or any other weapon, because the king’s mission was urgent.” 9 The priest replied, “The sword of Goliath the Philistine, whom you killed in the Valley of Elah, is here; it is wrapped in a cloth behind the ephod. If you want it, take it; there is no sword here but that one.” David said, “There is none like it; give it to me.”

I stole all of these from another post I made last week sometime. Your Bible is not infallible and error free.

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

GrayAngel said:
The plagues were not magic, they were miracles. There's a difference. Even in the Old Testament, magic was not very common. I can think of only a handful of cases when magicians are mentioned, and some of them don't even do all that much.

Besides, the Bible never says explicitly that magic is real, so you could choose to disregard it if you want. The miracles performed by God, however, were very real.

Firstly, Exodus clearly states Pharaoh had "magicians". Exodus also states pretty explicitly that these magicians were able to perform real, practical magic. The context of the story in Exodus leaves one in no doubt that the author believed magic was real. Also, I'm pretty sure that elsewhere in the "Books of the Law" Moses outlines punishments for those who practice any form of magic, divinity or clairvoyance. If the magic in Exodus wasn't real, then why should I believe in the miracles of God in Exodus?

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

GA777 said:
And the new rule of Satan since 1700s is not to show any evidence of his existance,

Do you have proof of this? Did Satan tell you?

GA777 said:
And there are lots and lots of historical facts present in the bible.If it was just a myth book,why would they include facts in it?

Just because a work of literature contains historical facts in it does not make the whole book true. Catch-22 is a book written about World War 2. There are many "facts" in there about the war, however the story as a whole is fiction.

Also, I'm not saying the whole of the Bible is myth. I'm just saying that, as a rational, thinking person, I have to discount some of the more mythological elements of it.

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

razeontherock said:
1) There is nothing about the OT that makes any of this a "liberal " occurrence. That is your false imposition onto the text. (Same holds true for God appearing, revealing, or any sort of Spiritual encounter)

2) There are scientific explanations for the entirety of the 10 plagues of Egypt, with the exception of the last, the killing of the first born. A link here would be good, but maybe somebody else here can provide?

To address point number 1; I'm not imposing anything on the text. The Israelites, in the "Books of Moses" appear to take magic and miracles for granted. The fact that Egyptian magicians could perform such feats described in Exodus strongly implies a belief in practical magic. Pharaoh himself seemed unimpressed by Moses' first few miracles that the magicians were able to duplicate. Also, the behaviour of the Israelites during their sojourn in the Wilderness tells anyone with a brain that they took miracles and magic for granted - they had God leading them by pillars of smoke and fire on a daily basis, they had manna from heaven on a daily basis, quail falling dead for them when they complained, water from rocks, frequent violent punishments from God and Moses such as the ground swallowing them up - these people lived with miracles and magic. How else am I supposed to read these things?

As for point number 2, yes, I remember watching a documentary on the science behind the miracles in Exodus. I can't remember how they explained the turning of sticks into snakes, but I remember that the frogs and locusts were explained quite easily. Plagues of such creatures were common in those days. However, Exodus explains these miracles as acts of God, not mishaps of nature.

GA777 · Sep 12, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
Do you have proof of this? Did Satan tell you?

Just because a work of literature contains historical facts in it does not make the whole book true. Catch-22 is a book written about World War 2. There are many "facts" in there about the war, however the story as a whole is fiction.

Also, I'm not saying the whole of the Bible is myth. I'm just saying that, as a rational, thinking person, I have to discount some of the more mythological elements of it.

Nope,historical records prove this.

And that's a book,I'm talking about 66 books,and not all of them have the supernatural in them.'

so, you just pick what you want and understand what you want of what is written in the bible.
Question : How can such a book carry great fulfilled prophecies?Would the prophecies be from God or from the people?

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

GA777 said:
Nope,historical records prove this.

Which ones? I've read many history books and none mention Satan going into hiding in the 1700's.

GA777 said:
And that's a book,I'm talking about 66 books,and not all of them have the supernatural in them.'

so, you just pick what you want and understand what you want of what is written in the bible.
Question : How can such a book carry great fulfilled prophecies?Would the prophecies be from God or from the people?

Firstly, I'm honestly not sure what parts of the Bible to believe and which to discard. I don't believe in magic and I've never seen a verifiable miracle for myself, so I have nothing to work with.

Secondly, prophecy in the Bible is obscure. Read the context of any of the prophecies of Jesus and you'll find the author is usually talking about someone else. As for the Book of Daniel, half was written in Aramaic and the other half in Hebrew leading one to conclude that it had two writers (more if you count the Deuterocanonical additions to it found in Catholic Bibles). Revelation is a mess written during a time of great suffering for Christians and was an attempt, modelled on Hebrew apocalypse stories, to encourage the Christians. Also, Jesus predicted his own return during his disciple's lifetime. It didn't come true. Paul and the other writers of the Old Testament were expecting Jesus' imminent return. So I have no reason to believe in Biblical prophecy and most of the church today takes a liberal (non-literal) position regarding it too.

GA777 · Sep 12, 2011

It's not in the books,at least not in those put in public.
And everything should be trusted in the bible,especially the NT becaus the OT isnt very clear for us in these late years after 2000-4000s years.

Jesus predicted his own return during his disciple's lifetime.

Can you please show me where he did that?
And there are messianic,and non messianic prophecies.

I'll start with the 1st prophecy which can be proved easily now:

Egypt

At one time the Egyptian Empire included Canaan, Syria and Lebanon, reaching to the upper Euphrates. The future of Egypt was foretold in detail:

It shall be the lowliest of the kingdoms; it shall never again exalt itself above the nations, for I will diminish them so that they will not rule over the nations any more. Ezekiel 29:15 (NKJV).

. . . and there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt: and I will put fear in the land of Egypt. Ezekiel 30:13 (KJV).

History shows the fulfillment of these prophecies. Egypt has not ruled over the nations since the time of the prophet Ezekiel (this prophecy). Egypt has been ruled by the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, Constantinople, the Saracen Arabs, the Mamelukes, the Turks, the French, and the English. In recent years, Egypt has not had princes.And it is really one of the lowliest nations.

For 2,500 years Egypt has been a lowly nation, just as the prophet foretold. You can visit Egypt and see that Egypt is truly one of the lowliest of nations. Its economy is down too and it is weak in millitary too although it's size is big enough.

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

I don't have time to go over every single prophecy of the Bible. Suffice it to say, I have read articles on Bible prophecy and heard so many failed prophecies during my time in charismatic Churches as a Christian that I have no reason whatsoever to believe in prophecy.

As for Jesus, read the Gospels. Jesus told his disciples that some of them would not taste death until they had seen him come in glory. Also, Jesus wraps up his discourse on end time events by telling his disciples that "this generation" shall not pass until all the things he says take place (I don't have a Bible handy but I think you can find that in Mark 13, near the end of the chapter, and also in the similar chapters in the Synoptics Matthew and Luke).

Anyway, I don't know how we got sidetracked into this stuff. I was originally asking about hell and what we can know of it from the Bible.

golgotha61 · Sep 12, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
A few Biblical errors:

Ezra 2:5 (KJV): The children of Arah, seven hundred seventy and five.
Nehemiah 7:10 (KJV): The children of Arah, six hundred fifty and two.

Click to expand...

The archives used by Nehemiah were more than likely from the originals that were used by Ezra and the discrepancy that appears in Nehemiah was probably due to an error in copying the roster since the other numbers of the family men are correct. There are other discrepancy in numbers of people, livestock, and articles in the Old Testament. Some other errors in copying by scribes are in the books of 1 and 2 Chronicles compared to 1 and 2 Kings. However, in the original autographs the Bible is without error of any kind. The fact that errors were made by scribes in the copying of the text in no way proves the Bible in its original autographs was in error.

2 Samuel 17:25 (KJV): And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother.
1 Chronicles 2:17 (KJV): And Abigail bare Amasa: and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmeelite.

Click to expand...

Here is an example of names and nationalities changed by the act of proselytizing. By birth his name is Jether, an Ishmaelite, but by religion he is Ithra, an Israelite. He married into David's family and was probably naturalized from an Ishmaelite to an Israelite.

I stole all of these from another post I made last week sometime. Your Bible is not infallible and error free.

Click to expand...

Like I said the Bible is without error in its original autographs. One must study to understand it and it requires a heart that seeks the truth instead of one that seeks to impugn.

golgotha61 · Sep 12, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
Which ones? I've read many history books and none mention Satan going into hiding in the 1700's.

Firstly, I'm honestly not sure what parts of the Bible to believe and which to discard. I don't believe in magic and I've never seen a verifiable miracle for myself, so I have nothing to work with.

Click to expand...

You cannot discard any part of the Bible since the problem is, you would end up accepting only what you desire to believe and would have a religion that is peculiar to only you. You don't change the Bible, the Bible changes you.

Secondly, prophecy in the Bible is obscure. Read the context of any of the prophecies of Jesus and you'll find the author is usually talking about someone else. As for the Book of Daniel, half was written in Aramaic and the other half in Hebrew leading one to conclude that it had two writers (more if you count the Deuterocanonical additions to it found in Catholic Bibles). Revelation is a mess written during a time of great suffering for Christians and was an attempt, modelled on Hebrew apocalypse stories, to encourage the Christians. Also, Jesus predicted his own return during his disciple's lifetime. It didn't come true. Paul and the other writers of the Old Testament were expecting Jesus' imminent return. So I have no reason to believe in Biblical prophecy and most of the church today takes a liberal (non-literal) position regarding it too.

Click to expand...

I won't go into the issue of prophecy unless it your desire but look at the issue you make with Jesus' claim to return during the lifetime of the apostles. I am not sure where you get this, perhaps you can give an address, but I suspect it came from Christ's glory being shown on the "mount of transfiguration" where the apostles James, John, and Peter were witnesses. This is in Luke 9.

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

golgotha61 said:
The archives used by Nehemiah were more than likely from the originals that were used by Ezra and the discrepancy that appears in Nehemiah was probably due to an error in copying the roster since the other numbers of the family men are correct. There are other discrepancy in numbers of people, livestock, and articles in the Old Testament. Some other errors in copying by scribes are in the books of 1 and 2 Chronicles compared to 1 and 2 Kings. However, in the original autographs the Bible is without error of any kind. The fact that errors were made by scribes in the copying of the text in no way proves the Bible in its original autographs was in error.

We don't have any original texts, so how can we know? Have you read the originals? No. So then you don't know either. What we have are copies of copies of copes of copes, etc. Our translations are based on those copies of copes. There's even evidence of clerical additions in the Bible (for example the last parts of Mark 16, the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 8, and many other bits of verses here and there). Perhaps the originals were the word of God, but they've been so tampered with by now that we'll never know for sure. Worse still, Christians are making doctrines out of bits of the Bible that were clerical additions.

You're free to believe the Bible is the infallible word of God if you want to. I don't. I think there may be truths in there, spiritual truths. But I certainly don't believe in magic, talking snakes, a 6 day literal creation period, a worldwide flood and other such mythological stories.

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

golgotha61 said:
You cannot discard any part of the Bible since the problem is, you would end up accepting only what you desire to believe and would have a religion that is peculiar to only you. You don't change the Bible, the Bible changes you.

Do you believe in Evolution, which has been scientifically proven? I do. I've read books on it and the evidence is overwhelming. How, therefore, can I accept what the Bible says about our origins? I used to actually. I used to believe God made us literally in 6 days around 6000 years ago. Having studied Evolution I just cannot go back to believing in Creationism. So therefore I have to reject what the Bible says about our origins and count it as mythology.

My problem now is that I am struggling with what other Bible bits to believe. I don't believe in magic and am in no way a superstitious person.

Besides this, Christians themselves pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow anyway. And no two Christians seem to have the same interpretation of Scripture either.

golgotha61 said:
I won't go into the issue of prophecy unless it your desire but look at the issue you make with Jesus' claim to return during the lifetime of the apostles. I am not sure where you get this, perhaps you can give an address, but I suspect it came from Christ's glory being shown on the "mount of transfiguration" where the apostles James, John, and Peter were witnesses. This is in Luke 9.

Here;

Matthew 16:24-28New International Version (NIV)

24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.25 For whoever wants to save their life[a] will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.26 What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done.

28 “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

Yeah, I've heard people say this is about the Transfiguration, but it can't be. Read the context. Jesus was talking about discipleship, and quickly moved on to talking about his second coming (as seen in verse 27). Also, the Transfiguration was not, in any way, the coming of Jesus' kingdom.

golgotha61 · Sep 12, 2011

Grumpy Old Man;58539489]We don't have any original texts, so how can we know?

We know because the Word of God is inspired by Himself (2 Tim. 3:16).

Have you read the originals? No. So then you don't know either. What we have are copies of copies of copes of copes, etc. Our translations are based on those copies of copes. There's even evidence of clerical additions in the Bible (for example the last parts of Mark 16, the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 8, and many other bits of verses here and there).

This is not true and I find it interesting you would believe those who deny the truthfulness of the Bible over the Bible itself.

Perhaps the originals were the word of God, but they've been so tampered with by now that we'll never know for sure. Worse still, Christians are making doctrines out of bits of the Bible that were clerical additions.

This is why the "Dead Sea Scrolls" were so important since they show the reliability of the Bible. You need to be more specific about these clerical additions. I have studied the different "criticisms", from the OT to the NT and have found that they really don't amount to much in light of further examination.

You're free to believe the Bible is the infallible word of God if you want to. I don't. I think there may be truths in there, spiritual truths. But I certainly don't believe in magic, talking snakes, a 6 day literal creation period, a worldwide flood and other such mythological stories.

And what studying have you done to investigate whether or not your assumptions are valid? How do you determine what part of the Bible is true and what part is not? If you choose what to believe according to your personal criteria, you become no different than those Christians you accuse of making doctrine out of "clerical additions".

golgotha61 · Sep 12, 2011

Grumpy Old Man said:
Do you believe in Evolution, which has been scientifically proven? I do. I've read books on it and the evidence is overwhelming. How, therefore, can I accept what the Bible says about our origins? I used to actually. I used to believe God made us literally in 6 days around 6000 years ago. Having studied Evolution I just cannot go back to believing in Creationism. So therefore I have to reject what the Bible says about our origins and count it as mythology.

Click to expand...

I have also studied evolution but I don't believe it is the mechanism that has given us the different life forms. The creation account was not written as a science book and was only given to those who could understand the concept. The Bible was written in the context of the writers, hearers, culture, and history so I don't expect the creation account to go into the explanations that would satisfy the scientific knowledge we have today.

My problem now is that I am struggling with what other Bible bits to believe. I don't believe in magic and am in no way a superstitious person.

Click to expand...

The miracles of the time you have referenced before were done in order to show the authority of the men God had chosen to be His representatives. Christ's miracles were for the same reason, to show His authority. That has been done and there is no more need to prove the authority of Christ. The book of Revelation gave the last warning and by the time the next group of miraculous events occur, it will be too late for many.

Yeah, I've heard people say this is about the Transfiguration, but it can't be. Read the context. Jesus was talking about discipleship, and quickly moved on to talking about his second coming (as seen in verse 27). Also, the Transfiguration was not, in any way, the coming of Jesus' kingdom.

Click to expand...

It is a fact and there is no issue with context. He simply goes from His father's glory to His own and referencing the Kingdom. What kingdom do you think is being talked about here? Here is the word kingdom that is in Matthew 16:25, defined in Strong's Greek and Hebrew Dictionary:
English Words used in KJV:
kingdom (of God) 71
kingdom (of heaven) 32
kingdom (general or evil) 20
(Thy or Thine) kingdom 6
His kingdom 6
the kingdom 5
(My) kingdom 4
miscellaneous translations 18
[Total Count: 162]

from <G935> (basileus); properly royalty, i.e. (abstract) rule, or (concrete) a realm (literal or figurative) :- kingdom, + reign.

Grumpy Old Man · Sep 12, 2011

golgotha61 said:
We know because the Word of God is inspired by Himself (2 Tim. 3:16).

This is not true and I find it interesting you would believe those who deny the truthfulness of the Bible over the Bible itself.

This is why the "Dead Sea Scrolls" were so important since they show the reliability of the Bible. You need to be more specific about these clerical additions. I have studied the different "criticisms", from the OT to the NT and have found that they really don't amount to much in light of further examination.

And what studying have you done to investigate whether or not your assumptions are valid? How do you determine what part of the Bible is true and what part is not? If you choose what to believe according to your personal criteria, you become no different than those Christians you accuse of making doctrine out of "clerical additions".

The clerical additions are real. You're in denial. Are you a KJV Onlyist? Pick up another Bible with good margin notes and read the notes corresponding to Mark 16 (verse 9 I think) and John chapter 8 where the story of the woman caught in adultery is. You'll find the notes will say something along the lines of "these verses are not found in older manuscripts". So far I can confirm this with the NIV, NASB and ESV translations. These verses were added later by a scribe. NOT MUCH STUDYING IS NEEDED TO KNOW THESE VERSES WERE ADDED LATER! The notes on the text make this abundantly clear.

Furthermore, the Dead Sea Scrolls are NOT originals. They are old, yes, and they shed some new light on the Bible BUT they are copies of copies, etc.

I'm not determining, at this time, what parts of the Bible are true and which aren't. I can tell you easily which parts are NOT true; those clerical additions I've mentioned.

Finally, just because God inspired the Bible does not mean every word is literally true. Stephen King wrote many books under the influence of drugs. You could say his books were inspired by drugs. Thankfully, none of his books are true stories. Similarly, there may be spiritual truths in the Bible, but not ones that should be taken literally (such as Jesus telling people to pluck their eyes out if it causes them to sin).

As a sidenote, 2 Timothy shouldn't even be in the Bible (or 1 Timothy, or Titus for that matter). They weren't written by Paul. They're forgeries written in his name by someone else looking to use Paul's authority. Read Bart D Erhman.

Tell me about Hell

Well-Known Member

World Christian in Progress

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

World Christian in Progress

World Christian in Progress

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

World Christian in Progress

World Christian in Progress

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency