Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: End of Days.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: End of Days. Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 7:50:39 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Well they did, as a matter of fact. Once off the ship, the daughters got Noah drunk and 'layed' with him.

I am doubting thomas, and I want to stick my fingers in his wounds.  Bring the son-of-a-bitch to me! He was accorded righteuosness for that very thing so I am covered anyway.

LOL,
Ron

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Kindred2Evil)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 8:04:31 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MistyMenthal


There is Archealogical Evidence that says the Ark
existed...
 
KISS ME Misty



Even if the evidence proved the ark to have existed, it has little relevence as to whether god exists.

There probably was reason for people to believe the world had flooded. There are so many mythic stories about it and goelogical evidence of massive areas of flooding and the known world would not have covered a massive geographical area for the average person so something probably did happen to provoke those myths. It still has little relevence as to whether god exists.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 5/15/2006 8:05:22 AM >

(in reply to MistyMenthal)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 8:42:11 AM   
MrMister


Posts: 272
Joined: 3/6/2005
Status: offline
The following I am submitting so as others so inclined may have a few things made a bit clearer regarding Christianity and the associated views, truths, etc. It’s not done in an effort to shove this down anyone’s throat so to speak. For the following fact is scriptural in it’s basis, and that is we as Christians can only tell others about Jesus, the rest is up to God and the particular person we tell this to. My hope is to shed light on a few things that I personally struggled with, and my findings on such matters. I feel compelled to do this simply because of what so many here have indicated that they believe all this is an absolute falsehood, and I merely want to point out my personal experience regarding this matter. But just know that I am not person that is well grounded in theology; these are just my findings. And one other disclaimer here, I am not trying to infer that I am a perfect, shinning example of Christianity, or even close to it for that matter. So please don’t criticize me too hastily and/or condemn me for my views, as these things I am discussing apply to me as to what I personally have discovered.

To understand the reason why Christians worship Jesus, one must first come to terms with who exactly Jesus is and who He claimed Himself to be. But please forgive me if you feel this is a bunch of nonsense or whatever, but I sincerely believe this is something we all need to hear, for what's at stake here is more than whether or not you merely believe Christians through out the world are involved with a heresy, but what you feel to be true in regards to Jesus and the biblical doctrine concerning our personal salvation and where we will spend eternity. For to look at Pascal’s Wager once again, if anyone else (as an unbeliever) is right and I am wrong about Him, then in the end you will have nothing to gain and I (and all other Christians) really will have nothing to lose, but if You are wrong and I am right about Jesus and where we will spend eternity, well, you will unfortunately have everything to lose and I will stand to gain everything. This is the very thing that prompted me to begin a search for some answers, but to search with an open mind.

You see God does not want us to simply come to Him in a blind leap of faith as some folks claim. The fact is God created each and every one of us with a mind and we were created in His image. That image is not only represented within our spirit, but also represented within our body, within our thoughts, within our emotions within each and every one of us. And this image is to be used when seeking God. He wants us to check Him out and verify His truths. If this were not so He would not have told Moses at the burning bush various ways to prove to the Israelites that God did in fact send Moses to lead His people out from Egypt. God expected the Israelites to ask the intelligent question "How do we know that God sent you". Or in the book of Isaiah (40-48), God challenges the Israelites to examine every other God and then challenges these Gods to do what He does. And when Christ died, He stuck around for forty days in order to show Himself to others and prove to them what had taken place so as they would believe. God wants us to test and check out all the signs and all the evidence. Our Christian faith is faith that is real and is rational. And it is a faith that can be believed in, trusted in, and can be tested.

At this point I feel the need to make a case for the very existence of God. I suppose to start with, I should tell you my basis for all Scriptural truth is found in the Bible as well as many other resources available to all.

The simple fact is I once was agnostic and firmly believed that someone must prove to me God did in fact exist. I needed empirical, scientific proof of such, for all I considered His existence to be was merely nothing more than a fairy tale. My subsequent conclusion was that I must look further than my mere belief in science, and the information contained the Scriptures. So I began to explore with an open mind, I repeat, an open mind. Some of the things I soon discovered were that one could not “empirically” prove through scientific evidence that Abraham Lincoln was shoot and killed at Ford Theater. One must rely on historical evidence and upon doing so; based upon the overwhelming support, there is no disputing that this incidence with President Lincoln actually happened. Most certainly, it is the very same concerning a search for the truth about Jesus and the Holy Scriptures.

When one objectively looks at the overwhelming amount of evidence to support the authenticity of the Bible, an individual can only come to the conclusion that the Bible is from God and Him alone. And that evidence for me lies in the fact that the Bible is shown to be reliable in five major ways: (1) textural transmission (the accuracy of the copying process down through history), (2) the conformation of the Old and New Testament by hard evidence uncovered through archaeology, (3) documentary evidence also uncovered through archaeology, (4) the internal evidence test of the New Testament, and (5) the external evidence test of the New Testament. Here are some facts that cannot be disputed, and not merely in my humble opinion. There are a multitude of reliable sources of antiquity other than the Bible for information concerning Jesus, i.e., Josephus, Polycarp, Roman Government archives, archeological evidence and many others. All of which I would implore anyone so inclined to find these sources on your own behalf and not simply take my word for it.

Some of the more compelling evidence in the Scriptures themselves can be found by looking at the prophetic fulfillment of the future Messiah mentioned over 300 times in various verses throughout the Old Testament, which were written hundreds of years before Christ. Given the study of statistics involving the theory and laws of mathematical probability, the fulfillment of these prophecies by any one person is astronomical. The combined probability against just 17 of these predictions occurring is equal to: 1 chance in 480 billion x 1 billion x 1 trillion or, 1 chance in 480,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Some Bible critics have suggested that Jesus of Nazareth, as a rabbi, naturally knew about these predictions and simply arranged the events of His life to fulfill these specific prophecies. But how would you arrange to be born in Bethlehem? How would you manage to be born into the tribe of Judah? How would you make sure that the price of your betrayal would be precisely thirty pieces of silver? How would you arrange to be crucified with thieves? How would a crucified man arrange to have his enemies gamble for his garments? The truth is that, if you could arrange all these details, you would have to be the Son of God.

Yes, I know some people’s rebuttal would suggest that men have written the Scriptures to conform to whatever they believed in and thus are propagating a lie. Once again, I would implore you to look at the vast amounts of copies of the writings of Moses, King David, Solomon, Ezra, Samuel, etc, etc, etc, that were passed down from generation to generation through out Jewish culture. There are literally were thousands and thousands of these documents stored on whatever means were available such as papyrus. The fact is there are no books of antiquity that can be confirmed for their validity other that the Bible. The only other work remotely close would be that of Homer, and there aren't copies dating back far enough in time to substantiate whether or not it had been faithfully copied from original text. The Holy Scriptures are not so, check it out for yourself.

Second, look at First Corinthians 15. The thing to bear in mind is Paul didn’t initially write this as being Holy Scripture; it was a letter to the church at Corinth just about thirty years after Jesus’ death and ascension. And stated in it was that Jesus died and was buried then rose after three days then was seen by many. He included Peter and other disciples, 500 people and even some people in the crowd he was talking to knew of these things that took place. The fact is if anyone could attest to anything other than what Paul was saying, they would have certainly spoken up. There is no evidence of anyone ever doing so.

Furthermore, each and every one of the disciples of Jesus proclaimed through out the land what had happened and whom Jesus was, never once denying Him. All of this was after they had been emotionally crushed after Jesus was killed, After all how could the Messiah allow Himself to suffer a horrible death at the hands of men, yet they were rejuvenated after seeing Jesus risen from the grave. Had this been a lie these men would not have went to their deaths and not admitted it as such. The fact once again is that every one of these disciples, with the exception of the Apostle John, died horrible deaths and never once denied Jesus was who He said He was. These things are recorded in various Roman archives, and other historians of the time.

Speaking of historians, Luke, who wrote Luke and Acts, was a physician and a historian. If you read his work you will find many historical references, of which there is a tremendous amount of archeological evidence to support what he wrote. As a matter of fact, there is absolutely nothing that has ever been discovered that disproves anything written in the Bible. The simple truth is there are archeological support, prophetic support, and historical support for what is written in the bible. I don’t mean this a derogatory statement against all other religions, but the same cannot be said for any other religion, period. If there is other supporting archeological, or prophetic, or historical evidence for any other religion, would someone please be so kind and point me towards it.

Now back to what i previously mentioned regarding Lincoln and him being shot. Yes there is this obvious evidence existing concerning Lincoln (i.e., a body in the grave with a bullet hole in the skull, DNA evidence, as well as eyewitness accounts), and even given such strong evidence for the event, which is for me by far enough evidence to say without a shadow of a doubt that this event actually happened. But demonstrative scientific evidence cannot be offered to prove that Lincoln was shot. The problem we face is that demonstrative scientific evidence requires a hypothesis capable of being tested repeatedly in a laboratory by other scientists to verify the results. What I was trying to emphasize was, the very nature of historical events is that they cannot be repeated and, therefore, cannot be tested by scientific methods. The great error of skeptics is that they demand scientific proof about historical accounts about Jesus in the Gospels when such absolute proof about any historical event is impossible to obtain. However, the question about the historicity of the Gospels’ claims about Jesus is a question of fact and precisely the type of question that has been considered and judged by courts of justice every day for thousands of years.

Courts judge the truthfulness of witnesses and questions of fact according to a fundamental rule briefly summarized as such: In trials of fact, by oral testimony, the proper inquiry is not whether it is possible that the testimony may be false, but whether there is sufficient probability that it is true. Unfortunately, many arguments against the genuineness of the Gospel account are based on a cavalier approach that quickly rejects the historical record about Christ whenever the slightest doubt is raised by anyone about any detail in the Gospel account. Unwilling to acknowledge that the evangelists’ accounts are probably true, they contemptuously reject the Gospels’ statements because they believe that it is possible that they might be false. If this unreasonable basis for judging the truth were applied to the records of the event of the assassination of Lincoln, we would have to throw out as unreliable virtually all the statements of actual witnesses that allow us to understand what happened during that tragic event.

Now I could go on a bit more, but for the sake of not getting into a novel, I will conclude with this: I would like to point out that the claims of the Gospel are so momentous that it is vital that we as individuals examine the evidence to determine whether the Gospel record is true or not. Nothing less that our soul’s eternal destiny is at stake. Personally, with me previously being a hardcore agnostic, it was once presented to me by someone who loved the Lord Jesus, to at the very least, consider the evidence. And for many of us, myself included, this was the most difficult part of the whole process of accepting Christ and His message. For God makes it all too easy to have eternal salvation, as it's a gift freely given to all who genuinely seek.

< Message edited by MrMister -- 5/15/2006 8:47:54 AM >

(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 8:49:29 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Well, it is well written but factually incorrect in nearly every aspect.

First of all and I am going to end it with this Ye'shua ha Notzri  is in no way equivalent to Jesus of  Nazareth.

Joshua the Nazarene is correctly  if you want the corrosive Jesus.......

Jesus of the sect of Nazarenes (a sect related to the Essenes) think Masada and so on......... so we can drop the manger bullshit right there.

but that is the first error, there is not much sense propounding the others.

Ron

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to MrMister)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 9:02:17 AM   
MrMister


Posts: 272
Joined: 3/6/2005
Status: offline
Please clue me in to the errors of my ways Ron, I am more than curious to hear and to fully understand where I may have trangressed.

Thanks.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 9:25:26 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Ok, I will go once around the barn, keeping my facts as brief and prima facia as yours.

(1) textural transmission (the accuracy of the copying process down through history)
This is of doubtful truth.  Some of the editing was done in order to more closely align the book with catholic desires, I will point to the 'lost books' and leave it there. 

(2) the conformation of the Old and New Testament by hard evidence uncovered through archaeology
Such as the what?  Let us start with the wandering for 40 years, no evidence that they (the tribes) were other than local Caananites.  No such mass exodus was recorded of Jews from Egypt.
(3) documentary evidence also uncovered through archaeology
12,000 monkeys.......some things being agreed does not mean the whole shebang is true.
(4) the internal evidence test of the New Testament
Explain the two begats chapters in (I think) Matt and Mark.....how do you account for the differences in geneology? 
(5) the external evidence test of the New Testament.
What external evidence might that be? Israel exists, therefore the kingdom of God.
Norway exists, therefore Asgaard and Vallhalla (a more convincing sort of argument, in my mind)

I am not of the opinion that you are not entitled to your own brand of fairytale as I am mine.........not a does my god or yours got the head of the bobsled thing, just ... a little light on what is being offered as evidence of the gimmick.

Here are some facts that cannot be disputed, and not merely in my humble opinion.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to MrMister)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:07:08 AM   
BrutalAntipathy


Posts: 412
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
(1) textural transmission (the accuracy of the copying process down through history)

The gospels seldom agree on many subjects, have differing theological outlooks, mangle the geography to such an extent that theologians are certain that some of the authors were never in Palestine, and cannot even agree on who the first people to witness the alleged ressurection were.

(2) the conformation of the Old and New Testament by hard evidence uncovered through archaeology

As demonstrated by Finkelstein and Silberman in the Bible Unearthed, archaeology seldom agrees with the Bible. Misinterpritation of data and artifacts in the late 1800's and early 1900's was presented as evidence, but has since been discounted. Also of note is that fiction writers do include elements of reality to give a story a more believable feel. Stephen King mentioned Buffalo Colorado and Sipe Springs Texas in his novel The Stand. This in no way makes The Stand a historically accurate piece of literature.

(3) documentary evidence also uncovered through archaeology

Doctumentary evidence such as? How about documentary evidence that the Bible is a compilation of older, pagan beliefs, rituals, and mythology? Ancient writings such as Gilgamesh, the Epic of Baal, the Sumerian kings list, the Egyptian Song of the Harper, and the law stele of Hammurapi tend to do just that very thing .

(4) the internal evidence test of the New Testament

See #1 above. Also, look at the context of the writings. As with prophecy which allegedly points to Jesus as messiah, much of it is pointless if read in context. Only when it is taken entirely out of context in consideration of the surrounding text does it appear to point to messiahship.

(5) the external evidence test of the New Testament. Here are some facts that cannot be disputed, and not merely in my humble opinion.

As the ' internal evidence ' is conflicting, inconsistant, and written over a period of 120 years,  it can be, and is, disputed.


Josephus : Josephuc wrote of the " christus ", or followers of the Christ. Nobody contests the fact that this cult existed. There is a second writing of his in which he allegedly mentions Jesus himself, but when it is read in context with the paragraphs above and below it, it is east to see that it was a later insertion. As further evidence for this, one of the earliest church fathers, Origen, was a Christian apologist. He mentioned Josephus frequently in his writings, but never once pointed to this passage. As an apologist writing responses to critics of the Church, he would have used this passage had he known about it.
 
Polycarp: A contemporary of Origen's, lived about 120 years after the ( supposed ) fact. Best known for his writings on the Pastoral letters of Paul, who himself was not an apostle of Jesus, nor did he know Jesus during his life.
 
Roman Government archives, archeological evidence and many others. All of which I would implore anyone so inclined to find these sources on your own behalf and not simply take my word for it.

There are no Roman archives that support this claim. Nor is there archaeological evidence for it. I would be more than happy to review any evidence you have in the contrary.
 
 
Some of the more compelling evidence in the Scriptures themselves can be found by looking at the prophetic fulfillment of the future Messiah mentioned over 300 times in various verses throughout the Old Testament, which were written hundreds of years before Christ. Given the study of statistics involving the theory and laws of mathematical probability, the fulfillment of these prophecies by any one person is astronomical. The combined probability against just 17 of these predictions occurring is equal to: 1 chance in 480 billion x 1 billion x 1 trillion or, 1 chance in 480,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
 
Show me a prophecy, and i'll show you how it was taken out of context and misapplied.
 


But how would you arrange to be born in Bethlehem?

How could a 9 months pregnant woman manage to ride almost 100 miles from Nazareth to Bethlehem in just an few days?
 
How would you manage to be born into the tribe of Judah?

If he were the son of Yahweh, he isn't of the tribe of Judah ( tribal heritage was paternal, not maternal ). If he is of the tribe of Judah, he isn't the son of God.
 


How would you make sure that the price of your betrayal would be precisely thirty pieces of silver?

It takes quite a stretch of the imagination to pretend that Zechariah 11: 12-13 is about Jesus. This isn't proof of prophecy, this is proof that the author of Matthew was a theological moron.

How would you arrange to be crucified with thieves?

Sedition and rabble rousing would get you that in the Roman Empire. Jesus did a bit of both.

How would you arrange to be crucified with thieves? How would a crucified man arrange to have his enemies gamble for his garments?

Better yet, how did the Centurian get away with carrying around purple robes? Purple was for Roman royalty, and a mere centurian with the audacity to carry it around would have been crucified himself.


The fact is there are no books of antiquity that can be confirmed for their validity other that the Bible.

Check the Bible against the Dead Sea Scrolls. The two contain multiple omissions and divergencies from one another. Add to this the fact that the Nicene councel had ordered the destruction of non canoniacal scripture and you can easily account for the apparant harmony.
 
 

He included Peter and other disciples, 500 people and even some people in the crowd he was talking to knew of these things that took place. The fact is if anyone could attest to anything other than what Paul was saying, they would have certainly spoken up. There is no evidence of anyone ever doing so.

Celsus and other critics often refuted much of Christian beliefs. And according to the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna's ressurection was witnessed by hundreds of people too. But, like Jesus' ressurection, these hundreds go unnamed in the Bhagavad Gita.


Had this been a lie these men would not have went to their deaths and not admitted it as such.

So David Koresh was telling the truth? After all, those people in his compound couldn't possibly have been willing to die because they believed a lie!
 
 

As a matter of fact, there is absolutely nothing that has ever been discovered that disproves anything written in the Bible.

How about no evidence for the Exodus, no confirming dates for the destruction of Canaanite cities by the Hebrew, that archaeologists say that Jerico had no walls during Joshua's time, just to name a few?

Unwilling to acknowledge that the evangelists’ accounts are probably true, they contemptuously reject the Gospels’ statements because they believe that it is possible that they might be false. If this unreasonable basis for judging the truth were applied to the records of the event of the assassination of Lincoln, we would have to throw out as unreliable virtually all the statements of actual witnesses that allow us to understand what happened during that tragic event.
If multiple witnesses give differing and sometimes conflicting accounts, they are not considered credible. Also of note is the fact that the majority of the Gospels are not considered to be written by apostles, nor were they written by eye witnesses.


Now I could go on a bit more,...

So could I.
 

(in reply to MrMister)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:17:00 AM   
agirl


Posts: 4530
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline
......Laughing here........ I smoke , I drink, I swear ............and will go crashing into my grave with a bottle of chardonnay in one hand yelling .....* WOW , what a ride THAT was!!*...Is there a better way?........Maybe I'm biased...my husband committed suicide....somehow it focussed my mind on living here and now....though I DO get told I live a little TOO much in the here and now ...LOL

Regards, agirl

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:29:52 AM   
agirl


Posts: 4530
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline
Call me sceptical ..... but apart from anything ever written about a God or gods........ It is rather TOO much for me to *believe* that an omnipotent being created man with a mind of his own..For what REASON?....... He fancied a torturous game?

If he wanted humans to live well, behave well, make *correct choices* etc ... he had the tools at hand to do so........I would HATE to have had to consider God as MY *loving father* .....lol

agirl


(in reply to agirl)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:48:59 AM   
RedRedWine


Posts: 157
Joined: 2/19/2006
Status: offline
Wanted? He still does. He longs for everyone to live well and make the right choices. Choices being a keyword. He gave us the right to choose. It's up to us to make our choices, only he can advise. He gave humans the right to say No to him and turn him away. If one wants his help, then one must GO to him for help. One needs to allow him into their life. He gave humans the right to choose whether or not they want him in.

I don't know if he made any other creations. I don't believe in aliens from another planet. Probably a selfish and stupid thing to say because Hey! Make two creations why not make three?? But for torture? No. We torture ourselves because we choose to rebel and we choose to look away because we think we are better and we know it all. God help us...no pun intented there. I kind of think of it like tough love. Mom tells me something that is good for me. I say fuck off...she backs up and says You Have At It. I do it, and BAM am I knocked down on my ass. Lol.

(in reply to agirl)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:52:07 AM   
BrutalAntipathy


Posts: 412
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RedRedWine

Wanted? He still does. He longs for everyone to live well and make the right choices. Choices being a keyword. He gave us the right to choose. It's up to us to make our choices, only he can advise. He gave humans the right to say No to him and turn him away. If one wants his help, then one must GO to him for help. One needs to allow him into their life. He gave humans the right to choose whether or not they want him in.

I don't know if he made any other creations. I don't believe in aliens from another planet. Probably a selfish and stupid thing to say because Hey! Make two creations why not make three?? But for torture? No. We torture ourselves because we choose to rebel and we choose to look away because we think we are better and we know it all. God help us...no pun intented there. I kind of think of it like tough love. Mom tells me something that is good for me. I say fuck off...she backs up and says You Have At It. I do it, and BAM am I knocked down on my ass. Lol.



God LOVES you. God wants you to be HAPPY. God is your FATHER. Oh, and if you don't obey him, he will send you to a place where you will be TORTURED FOREVER!
 
Yeah, real father figure there!

(in reply to RedRedWine)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:54:20 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Ahhhhhhh, Jesus!

Now we are back around to do Masters think they are God?

Cause that's exactly what I do with slaves when I got 'em handy.

Ron

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to BrutalAntipathy)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 10:57:14 AM   
BrutalAntipathy


Posts: 412
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Ahhhhhhh, Jesus!

Now we are back around to do Masters think they are God?

Cause that's exactly what I do with slaves when I got 'em handy.

Ron


My slave calls me her Baal. Baal being a word with several meanings, including lord, god, and master.  :)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:00:14 AM   
RedRedWine


Posts: 157
Joined: 2/19/2006
Status: offline
 Hell is not a torture chamber as many would have you believe, it is separation forever from God and that knowledge is the torture we inflict on ourselves.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:09:13 AM   
BrutalAntipathy


Posts: 412
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RedRedWine

Hell is not a torture chamber as many would have you believe, it is separation forever from God and that knowledge is the torture we inflict on ourselves.


Ok, so it is safe to tear the gospel of Mark out of the Bible, as Mark is obviously a liar, right?

Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched
 
Mark 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched
 
Mark 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire
 
Looks like we are safe to remove the book of James from there too.
 
James 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.

(in reply to RedRedWine)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:18:59 AM   
RedRedWine


Posts: 157
Joined: 2/19/2006
Status: offline
You cannot take one passage without taking the whole context of the teaching......that is why there are so many religions today that are kinky...LOL No pun intended there either. They take one Passage.
The baptist take the passage ... do not be drunk with wine............and say it is a sin to drink.  Hogwash

The pentecostals take the passage......and they were filled with the holy spirit and spoke in tongues unknown....and say if you don't do that you are not filled with the spririt of god. Hogwash.

The catholics take the scripture......go and preach and baptize in my name........and say if you are not baptized you cannot get into heaven...........hogwash, what about the man on the cross who did believe and was told by christ himself that he would be with him in paradise...........he didn't get down off the cross and baptise that man.


(in reply to BrutalAntipathy)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:22:45 AM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
So what you believe about the Bible is correct, and what anyone else believes is hogwash?

I have zero respect for that kind of religion.

(in reply to RedRedWine)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:23:09 AM   
RedRedWine


Posts: 157
Joined: 2/19/2006
Status: offline
Oh....and there are some who take Hebrews 10 and say you can lose your salvation..well that's just bull crap too.

(in reply to RedRedWine)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:27:29 AM   
RedRedWine


Posts: 157
Joined: 2/19/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

So what you believe about the Bible is correct, and what anyone else believes is hogwash?

I have zero respect for that kind of religion.



I believe that Jews and Christians are correct.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: End of Days. - 5/15/2006 11:41:06 AM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
Baptists and Catholics, whose views you just called "hogwash" (that is, after misrepresenting them), are Christians too.

(in reply to RedRedWine)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: End of Days. Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094