Mysteries of the Bible

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


To the best of my knowlege, the Bible Codes are a fraud.

Right, that's what I intended to state. But I was wondering if they are dumb enough to make a blatant error like having the bible code apply for a bible which is almost a translation of a translation (just like saying: There was a roman coin found in Mexico and it had the date 70 BC on one side

[finkian]

I, personally, believe the bible has benefit (for me) only as far as a cultural history of an ethnic history (OT), then the history of a religious movement (NT). However, I give the gospels the same skepticism that I give tales of Robin Hood or Paul Bunyan, or any other mythological character that has a root in fact.... I don't deny that a person such as Jesus didn't exist-- but feeding thousands? Walking on water? Returning from the dead? Why does it HAVE to be true stories to be taken literally-- instead of metaphors which contain much more meaning than a God-on-earth which had a lot more sense of charity in feeding the masses and healing the sick than his counterpart in Heaven. lol, it just is too improbable.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Triped
I hope you're all 100% certain that what the Bible says isn't true, because if you're wrong, it'll really suck.

Some things in the Bible are true, but I am 100% confident that the Bible is not 100% true and isn't the word of God. It is a patent impossibility.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Adalbertus
I didn't say anything about an outside source available to us. I said that the bible said that there are non-Christian people you can ask about the death of Jesus, but not about his resurrection.
Now for the third time.

There is no one to ask and no one that said anything. We only have the Bibles word that such a person even existed.

I am curious what you thought the point of mentioning him was since you are aware there is no way to check on him.

That was probably why the bible mentioned two women who didn't know how to take away the stone which was closing the tomb. And I'd doubt that Jesus after suffering a crucification and two days without food would be stronger than two women. I don't know how many other people at that time would dare to open a tomb of someone who is dead if he suddenly appears to be quite alive.

Which is not evidence that he was fully and completely dead. Especially when you consider that none of it can be verified.

There are however other indications in the Bible that an earthquake may have occured. Graves opening and the dead going walkies. I do wonder how the Jews and Romans both missed the dead taking a walk.

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Triped
I hope you're all 100% certain that what the Bible says isn't true, because if you're wrong, it'll really suck.

If what the Bible says is true about Jehovah that REALLY sucks. Slaughtering all but eight members of the human race plus nearly every animal on Earth. Thats psychotic to a level beyond the worst human monster.

[Triped]

What you call psychotic I call just and infinitely wise. Keep in mind that human and animal rights are really man's invention.

[Ethelred]

Keep in mind that human and animal rights are really man's invention.

Keep in mind we have our best interests at heart. Can't say the same for mass killers.

Jehovah did more than just one mass murder that included innocents. Exodus is a prime example.

[Triped]

Well, keep in mind that according to the Bible, man deserves death, and it's only through grace, etc., that we still live.

So there are no "innocents". And the Bible itself says "and no one can say to Him, 'what hast Thou done?'" -Deut. something or other

[Ethelred]

Well, keep in mind that according to the Bible, man deserves death, and it's only through grace, etc., that we still live.

Well then Jehovah is a real putz as a designer. Why create such garbage as the Bible insists we are? Some perfection.

So there are no "innocents". And the Bible itself says "and no one can say to Him, 'what hast Thou done?'" -Deut. something or other

I can. If he shows himself anyway. Hey Jehovah if your perfect why did your creations become corrupt? Why did you kill innocent children in Egypt and the flood? Why is it that the Universe and the Bible don't match.

And he will answer. Well some humans are just gullible. Its more entertaining if I don't know what is going to happen. That book sure is silly. Why would I kill kids just because Moses is annoyed with Pharoah? Well at least one human is fit for eternal life anyway.

[Adalbertus]

I am curious what you thought the point of mentioning him was since you are aware there is no way to check on him.

I wanted to point out the different levels of verifiability the bible puts into death and resurrection - death: Go to Jerusalem and ask - resurrection: Only his followers know. 50 - 90 AC when the gospels were written, the death of Jesus was probably too well known in Jerusalem to lie about. In Rome, there was no reason to take notice of Jesus, in Judea and Galilea he was probably quite well known.

There is no way to independently check on JC (Julius Caesar) - only Roman sources, a well made fraud by Augustus.

Well then Jehovah is a real putz as a designer. Why create such garbage as the Bible insists we are? Some perfection.

From other posts I think you don't believe in a free will - ok then you are right. I do, and being created perfectly probably would be incompatible with free will. Love without having the freedom to hate would be worthless.

[Wernazuma III]

So, with this free will: God must be like a sadistic scientist making nasty experiments: Let's have a look what they're going to **** up, when they get a free will...

[Adalbertus]

Believe it so if you prefer. I prefer to think that the value of love out of a free will is bigger than anything we can *** up. To be more clear: Without free will, I don't see really a reason to exist. And it would justify to solve the ME problem with a few nukes. Hey, even Britain, France or Israel could do that. Oh, I forgot that Israel has no nuclear devices

[Ethelred]

Originally posted by Adalbertus
. 50 - 90 AC when the gospels were written, the death of Jesus was probably too well known in Jerusalem to lie about.

The dates are highly debatable. John is often thought to be from 150 AD.

In Rome, there was no reason to take notice of Jesus, in Judea and Galilea he was probably quite well known.

Rome liked records. It is likely that he was well known in some circles. Maybe even well known but others are well known outside the Bible.

There is no way to independently check on JC (Julius Caesar) - only Roman sources, a well made fraud by Augustus.

Well Julius wrote his one books. Others wrote about him. There are statues from HIS time and coins and much else besides a few books. For Jesus there are only religious books and they do not agree on all things.

From other posts I think you don't believe in a free will - ok then you are right.

Where ever did you get that idea?

I do, and being created perfectly probably would be incompatible with free will. Love without having the freedom to hate would be worthless.

That is mere evasion. Free will has nothing to do with a design so bad ALL but eight are evil. It has nothing to do with Jehovah killing children either.

Keep in mind that I am not saying that myself. I am taking it straight from the Bible. A book I greatly doubt is accurate but you do not. Some people get upset and think I am disparaging GOD when I am mererly reporting accurately what the Bible really says.

[Zevico]

Aldabertus: what do Matthew and Luke say?
What I point out is that the BIOLOGICAL father has to be of the tribe of Judah, descended from David. God isn't Jewish. Joseph may descend from David, but as long as Jesus is the son of god, he can't be the messiah in principle. Matthew and Luke, cannot say that descendants of David can't be the Messiah is for one simple reason: this happens after Jesus's death-therefore they are (in keeping with jewish tradition) making up excuses for whatever hooplah they want to convince people about.

[Boris Godunov]

Biblethumpers tend to think, Ethelred, that if you don't believe in their interpretation of the Bible, you must be a heathen atheist.

I don't believe in the Bible, and I am not an atheist. Chew on that!