Keaton
Full Member
Come with me, to the Emerald City.
Posts: 266
|
Post by Keaton on Aug 30, 2007 17:30:43 GMT -5
In the Holy Land (Israel) there is plenty of evidence of the Bible such as the story of Lot and his family. The Bible says Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt because of her disobedience to God. My parents have personally been to the Holy Land and I've seen a video about popular places there. I've seen a picture of what people think is Lot's wife (now a pillar of salt).
I wouldn't take everything in the Bible literally. I think the Book of Revelation is symbolic, not to be taken literally.
As for the Gnostic Gospels and the books like the Gospel of Judas, I believe that when the men who selected the books that should be put into the Bible, God gave them the guidance and wisdom to put the "right" books in the Bible, or the books that God wanted us to read. Like the Gospel of Judas may have been written by someone from another religion who was trying to mislead Christians. It could just be a load of fiction. Thus, when God gave the "Bible books selectors" the guidance they needed, he told them not to put the Gospel of Judas in there.
And yes, there were "Bible books selectors".
I am a firm believer that 100 percent of the Holy Bible is true.
~*~*Keaton*~*~ A proud Jesus freak
|
|
|
Post by Swoosh on Aug 30, 2007 17:50:07 GMT -5
Meh, I'm fine with the God-divined Word thing, but the God-inspired Bible book selectors doesn't grab me as very realistic. God has allowed people to mess with, misinterpret, and thoroughly screw over His Word for centuries - why would he place so much importance on THIS particular counsel and THIS particular compilation?
|
|
Keaton
Full Member
Come with me, to the Emerald City.
Posts: 266
|
Post by Keaton on Aug 30, 2007 18:00:45 GMT -5
Because the books that were selected would be put into the Holy Bible, the main way God communicates with us. If God had something in there that shouldn't be in there, that wouldn't be too good. The Holy Bible has influenced God's followers for over a thousand years, at least.
|
|
|
Post by tyler on Aug 30, 2007 19:07:00 GMT -5
Wow, Keaton, I'm impressed.
~Tyler, briefly entering, and now leaving this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Swoosh on Aug 30, 2007 20:18:12 GMT -5
Well, if God intervened in the creation of His Holy Scriptures, why didn't he intervene when Catholicism (the first form of Christianity) formulated all these wild ideas about purgatory, Hail Marys, and whatnot. Considering that they were one of the first and definitely one of the largest Christian factions, why didn't God step in and say, "Whoa! Guys, come on, you've got it all wrong!"
|
|
maria
New Member
Posts: 1
|
Post by maria on Aug 30, 2007 22:23:14 GMT -5
Well, if God intervened in the creation of His Holy Scriptures, why didn't he intervene when Catholicism (the first form of Christianity) formulated all these wild ideas about purgatory, Hail Marys, and whatnot. Considering that they were one of the first and definitely one of the largest Christian factions, why didn't God step in and say, "Whoa! Guys, come on, you've got it all wrong!" ...um... because they were WRONG??
|
|
|
Post by Swoosh on Aug 31, 2007 6:04:15 GMT -5
So God let Catholics be wrong... but he didn't let Constantine's council be wrong?
There's a flaw in the logic here somewhere...
|
|
Keaton
Full Member
Come with me, to the Emerald City.
Posts: 266
|
Post by Keaton on Aug 31, 2007 16:39:15 GMT -5
The Catholics chose their own beliefs. Constantine's Council was different. God gave the Catholics a choice of what to believe. Constantine's Council wasn't making their own decision, they were making a religion changing decision, God had to step in. God let's people choose their own beliefs and actions, because he loves us. Life would be boring if we didn't know good from evil and it was a perfect world.
|
|
|
Post by Swoosh on Aug 31, 2007 17:27:23 GMT -5
But, wait a minute - these arguments are so contradictory.
"God was dealing with the Creation of a whole new religion here!" - Then WHAT is Catholicism? You have to admit, despite what Catholics say, they're pretty much their own religion - enough to be set apart from ALL other denominations.
|
|
|
Post by Nina ♥ on Aug 31, 2007 19:49:09 GMT -5
This isn't much of an argument but Swoosh these things really piss me off. I mean now that your an athiest you are posting all this crap just so you can say "OMFG JEZUZ IS STUPIDD!!! ATHIUMISM LOLZ"
it bugs me
|
|
|
Post by {joy the hideous new girl} on Sept 1, 2007 13:23:36 GMT -5
Swoosh is saying nothing of the sort. Nina, If you're mad at anyone, it should be me. At least he's backing up his opinion. I'm just too lazy.
|
|
|
Post by Swoosh on Sept 1, 2007 13:27:52 GMT -5
Yeah, Nina, I'm insulted. I always try to back up my opinions with facts and evidence when I'm pointing out holes in Christianity, as do Maria, Tyler and Keaton when they're defending it. The only person who's giving their "group" a bad name is you...
Sorry if that sounded mean, I love you dearly, but I don't appreciate it when you insult me like that.
|
|
Keaton
Full Member
Come with me, to the Emerald City.
Posts: 266
|
Post by Keaton on Sept 18, 2007 14:00:52 GMT -5
Swoosh, did any people who had seen the Bible way way way back in the day (30 AD or so) said, "There was no Jesus!"? No...There were eye-witnesses of Jesus' crucifixion and ministry . If people had said the previous quote about there not being a Jesus, people would have discounted the Bible and there would be no Christianity today. I know what your counter-arguement is gonna be. "Well I'm say there's no Jesus and there's still Christianity now." Well, back then when Christianity wasn't popular, it would've died quickly, my friend.
|
|
|
Post by Swoosh on Sept 18, 2007 16:23:55 GMT -5
Uhm - did I ever say there was no Jesus? Hardly anyone denies that Jesus existed - any historian wil ltell you he walked this Earth aroud approximately the first century AD.
|
|
|
Post by {joy the hideous new girl} on Sept 18, 2007 19:39:24 GMT -5
Jesus was born a few years BC. =)
People is stupid.
|
|