1. Welcome to the All Things Male Forum. Please sign up and join the conversation. It's free!

Thanks Have the Guys Lost Interest in Supporting the Forum?

Discussion in 'Off Topic Discussion' started by Dr. John Crisler, Jun 20, 2008.

  1. 00slotiv

    00slotiv Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    15
    Joe, I am trying desperately to reply but keep losing my post. After two hours of this, I am going to have to keep it short.

    http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020908.htm

    http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20050529.htm

    http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/answering.htm
    These archives add many more apparent contradictions to your three good ones.

    One I like is below-

    http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020623.htm

    There were also two Jerichos near each other on the one you mentioned in your post.

    The skepticism is good and these contradictions have an answer. The Bible was written by any people over many years inspired by the Holy Spirit, and can be called the most accurate historical document in the world, by far.

    Sometimes an author only focuses on one aspect of a situation and the Holy Spirit causes another writer to focus on a different aspect of the same situation. Sometimes something is from God's perspective and another time from man's perspective. Same event, different views, and so on. The authors are reporting from their knowledge at that time

    Lee Strobel can be googled as well as a book called More than a Carpenter. I did that for you but then lost all my post so that is all I will mention now so it doesn't happen again. They will help explain the accuracy of the Bible compared to other documents we conclude are accurate but can't compete with the Word of God, nor can they.

    In my opinion, if the Bible is not the inspired, inerrant Word of God, it has no power and is likened to any other document. If it is written by God the Holy Spirit, it is the key to the way to eternal life and the reason why the Creator gave it to us.

    A person could spend several lifetimes and not plumb it's depths, it is so rich. If we need to know it, it's in there.

    I appreciate the chance to stray from the norm along with others in this thread.

    Bob
     
  2. 00slotiv

    00slotiv Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    15
    http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_book.html

    Back from a pretty good fireworks show in the neighborhood.

    The link above contains hundreds of apparent Biblical contradictions, along with ways to reconcile them.

    Just tonight if I asked several people on the same street corner what they saw for fireworks I would have gotten all slighly different replies. One focusing on the loud ones, another on the colorful ones, someone describing what they saw to the east, another one what they saw to the west.

    Someone who had never seen them before would describe it differently than someone who has seen them for decades.

    It all boils down to faith at the end of the day.

    Bob
     
  3. Bulldog

    Bulldog Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,901
    Likes Received:
    26
    Jesus clearly refers to himself and God as one and the same in several places in the Holy Bible. Here is one example.

    From the NLT
    John 14
    8 Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father, and we will be satisfied."
    9 Jesus replied, "Have I been with you all this time, Philip, and yet you still don't know who I am? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father! So why are you asking me to show him to you?


    There is also a clear reference to the Trinity in the Book of Matthew.

    Matthew 28

    19 Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations,* baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
     
  4. Sargovar

    Sargovar New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,280
    Likes Received:
    2
    Re: Totally weighty and even cliched questions, but which still puzzle me:

    Good question. Why indeed? Well, that's why I'm here.. seeking an answer.. hoping to perhaps find a solution and land myself in a place where the levity outweighs the gravity. I don't want much from life.. give me a healthy hormonal milieu and a sense of physical well-being and I'll be a happy camper. That shouldn't be too much to ask, at least not for someone who has always done his best to stay healthy. And it goes without saying that the mental/emotional side of me will brighten up considerably when the broken temple that is my body is rebuilt to its former glory and splendor (or beyond.. not to sound too greedy :p ).

    Anyway, I don't mean to sound all serious and full of doom n' gloom.. I do have a sense of humor about life. If I didn't, I doubt I'd be around any longer.
     
  5. 00slotiv

    00slotiv Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    15
    Another good one Bulldog is in Genesis 1:26-And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.

    Bob
     
  6. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    It is very clear from this verse that Jesus (PBU) did not explicitly say "I am God." To be honest with one's self, one cannot truely conclude from the above that Jesus is even saying that he is God or even that he and God are one. In this verse, it is very clear that Jesus is implying that through the miracles that he has performed with the "will of God above"; it is suffice for Phillip and everyone to recognize the existence of God without the need for God to reveal Himself physically in front of everyone’s eyes.

    Jesus (PBU) as a prophet had to prove to people that he was sent by God to humanity. Of course!! He didn’t just show up one day and demanded that people follow him without any proof of his prophesy. The verse John 14 above clearly shows that Jesus did not say “I am God”; as no one has ever seen God. Look:

    "No man hath seen God at any time,"
    John 1:18

    "No man hath seen God at any time,"
    1 John 4:12

    If you insist that the verse John 14 means that Jesus is God (since you're claiming that Jesus and God are one), then you surely are proving the contradiction in the bible using the bible and that John1:18 and John 4:12 are all lies. Luckily there’s no contradiction in the above as Jesus did not imply that he’s God in John 14 as many of the Christian scholars would lead you to believe.

    Let’s go further; was Philip the only one who’s ever “seen the father”??

    "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father."
    John 6:46

    What is meat by "is of God"? Let the bible answer:

    "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God."
    John 8:47.

    And

    "Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God"
    3 John 1:11.

    Have all people who have done good also physically seen God? Of course not.
     
  7. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    The concept of the Trinity was not introduced into Christianity until about 400 years after the departure of Jesus (PBU).

    In "The New Catholic Encyclopedia" (Bearing the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur, indicating official approval)

    "...It is difficult in the second half of the 20th century to offer a clear, objective and straightforward account of the revelation, doctrinal evolution, and theological elaboration of the Mystery of the trinity. Trinitarian discussion, Roman Catholic as well as other, present a somewhat unsteady silhouette. Two things have happened. There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics, that one should not speak of Trinitarianism in the New Testament without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4th century. It was only then that what might be called the definitive Trinitarian dogma 'One God in three Persons' became thoroughly assimilated into Christian life and thought ... it was the product of 3 centuries of doctrinal development" (emphasis added).
    "The New Catholic Encyclopedia" Volume XIV, p. 295.

    This begs the question. If Trinity is true, why didn't Jesus (PBU) ever mentioned it at least one time during his life?? Did he mean to leave his closest followers in utter confusion about the nature of the One they need to worship?; leaving them, their children and their childern's children in complete ambiguity regarding the message that he himself was chosen to spread to humanity; not until 400 years afterwards when suddenly the Trinity was born to explain what he meant?? Would God send a messenger that is incompetent of explaining His message to the entire world?? If the Trinity was true, you'd imagine Jesus making an explicit mention of it..Something that go like this "God, the holly spirit and I are three persons in one Trinity. Worship all of us in One." If he has mentioned this fact just once, that would have been a closed case.

    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008
  8. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    Firstly; Reading Matthew 28 does not imply that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are all one God and they should be worshiped as one in Trinity. But, how do we know for sure there was no insertion and modification in the bible in order to bring it in line with already established beliefs. Here what Tom Harpur, former religion editor of the Toronto Star says:

    "All but the most conservative of scholars agree that at least the latter part of this command was inserted later. The formula occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and we know from the only evidence available (the rest of the New Testament) that the earliest Church did not baptize people using these words - baptism was 'into' or 'in' the name of Jesus alone. Thus it is argued that the verse originally read 'baptizing them in my name' and then was expanded to work in the dogma. In fact, the first view put forward by German critical scholars as well as the Unitarians in the nineteenth century, was stated as the accepted position of mainline scholarship as long ago as 1919, when Peake's commentary was first published: 'The church of the first days did not observe this world-wide commandment, even if they new it. The command to baptize into the threefold name is a late doctrinal expansion.'"

    "For Christ's sake," Tom Harpur, p. 103

    ("the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost") was not originally part of the command of Jesus but was inserted by the church long after Jesus' departure.

    "And Peter said to them, 'Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;...'"
    Acts 2:38.

    Again... Who am I to follow?? My beloved prophet Jesus's teachings; or the teachings of the church 4 centuries after he had left???

    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008
  9. anyman

    anyman New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    871
    Likes Received:
    0
    Recent posts again got my wondering & thinking about a debate I had long ago.

    I read with interest the various posts dissecting selected passages of the Bible, etc. There are indeed an unusual number of interpretations. Of course, what modern readers and scholars often miss is knowledge and appreciation of the historical context. What means one thing today might have been very, very different in the past. Silly example: The word "gay" has a quite different usage now than 100 years ago. The same thing happens when interpreting Constitutional law. What the framers intended and what they were attempting to address/protect must be viewed in the prism of the world they lived in, but I digress.

    What still makes me think is whether some truths are universal or if there are multiple paths to a common end point. If certain beliefs were truly universal, wouldn't they be hard wired into us? We seem hard wired to an extent to believe in something, starting with primitive man's superstitions and shamans to today's enormous belief systems. Are we hard wired to accept a creator or is this merely a defense mechanism to cope with the futility of being in a cold, hard world? If hard wired for God, why is the wiring not clearer and more universal? In this vein, I wonder how "universal" some beliefs can be since they must be taught. If we took a group of children never exposed to modern religion and raised them in relative isolation, allowing them further to grow to a substantial population w/o outside influences, what are the odds Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc would spontaneously occur? I'd be willing to bet that entirely new and different beliefs would arise.

    Reminds me of a debate I had w/ a fundamentalist Christian many years ago. He was adament that unless a person personally accepted JC as his personal savior said person was "doomed".

    I asked him if such applied to "all people" and heard "yes, of course--ALL people". Hmmm...I thought.

    I then asked "Are you aware of tribes in remote areas only recently discovered in the Amazon & Papua New Guinea?" He replied "yes", to which I then said "Would you agree that these people are human like you and
    me?" "Yes" was his response, so I followed up with "Would you agree that until very recently these people--and we agree they are people, right-- could not possibly have heard your theory and proposed absolute truth?". He replied again in the affirmative.

    "So", I said, "Are you telling me that these people, who by mere chance were born in a remote location and thus could not have heard your message would be forever damned and doomed?". "Yes", he responded, but there was now uncertainty in his voice.

    I could see the discomfort on his face starting to grow as he realized the inconsistency of his position, so I followed with "You tell me your God is wonderful and compassionate, but is it fair and just that he would damn many people to eternal badness simply because they had the misfortune of being born in a rain forest as opposed to the US?"

    I got silence in return.
     
  10. Bulldog

    Bulldog Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,901
    Likes Received:
    26
    Because it is understood from his words and teachings without being directly stated. I don't think there is any confusion who should be worshiped.

    Titus 2:13 (New International Version)

    13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be revealed.
     
  11. GirlyMan

    GirlyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    1
    I like that one. Simple, to the point, doesn't ask of me that which I am unable (or at least unwilling, though I don't like that word) to give. Perfect!
     
  12. anyman

    anyman New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2007
    Messages:
    871
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good one.

    Simple, straight and to the point. As it should be. Finally.....
     
  13. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    The words "us" and "our" in Genesis 1:26 does not mean that God is many. In Hebrew and in Arabic, "We" is used as a plural for "respect." It's a matter of a language difference between English and Hebrew. Among the Jews; during the times of the prophet Jesus(PBU), it was a common way to use the plural form in order to display respect and humility.

    When reading the bible; it is very important to view it in the context of the people it was sent to and what their language was. You can't just read it in a vacuum without relating it to the times when it was revealed and the people who understood it.

    In the Old Testament, the Jews refer to God as "Elohiym" {el-o-heem}. "Elohiym" is the plural form of "'elowahh" {el-o'-ah}, which means "god." We all know that the Jews do not pray to a "Trinity," even though their book refers to God in the plural form. This is how people spoke during that time.

    In the Eerdmans Bible Dictionary we read the following explanation of the word "Elohiym":

    "As a name or designation of the God of Israel, the term is understood as a plural of majesty or an intensive plural, indicating the fullness of the supreme (or only) God ... the canonical intent is clearly monotheistic, even where the accompanying verbs or adjectives are grammatically plural (e.g. Gen. 20:13, Exod. 22:9 [Mt 8])"

    There are some examples that we can draw from our current day language. For instance, it's a common phrase to hear one of us say "I'm going to hit the hay." We all understand that this person is going to bed to sleep or take a nap. Now can you imagine some guy in China ten centuries later reading such a phrase?? He would surely think that this person was forming a fist and pummeling the heck out of some stack of hay!!!.

    In the Quran, you'll find huge number of verses where God refer to Himself in the plural form. However, this is very understood in the arabic language that it does not mean more than one. This is just how the language is spoken up to this present day. It is understood by all; from the smartest schollar to the bedouin in the desert.

    .
     
  14. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    This verse was a reference from Saint Paul (400 years afer Jesus) who's never met Jesus and went on killing all Christians without descrimination until he suddenly got inspired and started spreading Christianity according to his own beliefs and teachings. Again; the above is not a good reference where Jesus himself claimed to be God. He never did.

    Besides; it goes back to how the language meant during the times of Jesus (PBU). The word God was a common way of speaking during those times. It does not mean that Jesus is God Almighty and that he should be worshiped. This is how the jews spoke. As a matter of fact the word God was used in the bible to refer to the jews ..

    "I have said, Ye (the Jews) are gods; and all of you are children of the most High"
    Psalms 82:6:

    It was even used to refer to the devil himself.. read:

    "the god of this world (the Devil) hath blinded the minds of them which believe not."
    2 Corinthians 4:4

    If you were to obtain the original greek manuscript of the bible you'll learn how mistranslation has taken place. Suddenly when referring to Jesus; God with a capital G is used but when when referring to everyone else the word god with small letter g is now used.

    This is the word for God, god in greek:

    theos theh'-os: a deity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very -- exceeding, God, god(-ly, -ward).

    Actually his words and teachings lead us to believe in one God Almighty and not the trinity, and he directly states so:

    "...The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord."
    Mark 12:29

    You'd expect the messenge of God Jesus (PBU) to explain the nature of the God he's ordering his followers to worship. Afterall this is his only reason for being on this earth. If the trinity was true, it's only fair to expect him to clearly state so and not just talk in riddles and in an indirect way regarding such an important message. However, Jesus himself repeatedly talks in a very direct way with regards to the unity of God. He directly mention the oneness of God close to 80 times in verious places in the bible. Then when we ask about the trinity, the church runs to what Saint Paul has said instead. Again; who am I to believe?? I will choose to believe the prophet of Allah Jesus; the son of Mary (PBU).

    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2008
  15. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Recent posts again got my wondering & thinking about a debate I had long ago.

    Hahaha.. Very interesting dialog...

    Actually, to answer your question, God has created us wired to believe in one God associating no partners with Him.

    I would bet the groupl of children will grow up believing in one creator with no partners; the One who created all.

    It is so simple and clear. It is the teachings of all the prophets as I have been stressing in my many posts here.

    .
     
  16. GirlyMan

    GirlyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Recent posts again got my wondering & thinking about a debate I had long ago.

    Both.
     
  17. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    In the British newspaper the "Daily News" 25/6/84 under the heading "Shock survey of Anglican Bishops" We read

    "More than half of England's Anglican Bishops say that Christians are not obliged to believe that Jesus Christ was God, according to a survey published today. The pole of 31 of England's 39 bishops shows that many of them think that Christ's miracles, the virgin birth and the resurrection might not have happened exactly as described in the Bible. Only 11 of the bishops insisted that Christians must regard Christ as both God and man, while 19 said it was sufficient to regard Jesus as 'God's supreme agent'"

    Don't Anglican Bishops hold high authority in the Christian faith?? Of course; and they are drawn to the ultimate truth about Jesus; that he's merely a messenger of God and not God himself. This is confirmed in the bible:

    "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
    John 17:3

    This is consistent with what God has told us in the noble Qur'an 1400 years ago:

    "And when Allah said: O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah? he said: Be You glorified. It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then You knew it. You know what is in my [innermost] self but I know not what is in Yours. Truly! You, only You are the Knower of things hidden. I spoke unto them only that which You commanded me, (saying): Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them, and when You took me You were the Watcher over them, and You are Witness over all things."
    The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):116-118


    .
     
  18. Dr. John Crisler

    Dr. John Crisler Lord of the Forum Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2007
    Messages:
    10,758
    Likes Received:
    92
    Of course, all religions are based upon faith. As I think about it, perhaps so is atheism--they believe there is no Supreme Intelligence which exists in a manner we cannot directly perceive.

    Personally, I think there is just so much we do not understand. In the meantime, I am being good for goodness' sake. Life is much better that way.

    But, yes, I do think there is a hierarchy of some sort above and beyond us.
     
  19. BigAk

    BigAk Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1
    Exactly correct.. and this is the normal human instinct that God has created in us.... Human instinct. It is similar to our genetic makeup and DNA. Our bodies know what they're supposed to do on their own.. It is miraculous.

    .

    .
     
  20. GirlyMan

    GirlyMan New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2008
    Messages:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    1
    "Believe" sounds too strong. "Suspect" sounds closer.

    Precisely.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.