- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
yes nick,
thank GOD bec he opened your mind and now you believe that the word in john 1.1 is the son of GOD.
praise GOD!Frank,
The dead sea has manuscripts of the OT in both Hebrew and Greek.
Of the New Testiment, The Codex Sinaiticus is a Greek language and some earlier papari also in Greek are the earliest found.
There were probably Hebrew, Greek, and Latin copies originally as those three languages were used on the sign that Jesus' cross bore.
I already addressed a Hebrew point of view of that period and you did not like it.
Hi Jammin,
Yes Jesus became the Son of God by anointing of the Word at the Jordan.
You can follow himQuote (Ed J @ May 01 2012,11:52) Quote (Colter @ May 01 2012,11:36) Quote (Ed J @ May 01 2012,09:20) HI Colter, Hearsay and popular opinion,
nothing that could be considered as evidence?Pointing to (Chronicles and Kings) the books of the scribes of the king,
to classify these as less than canon, would the book of Urantia not fall into this same classification?God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Pride blinds Ed j, you have your entire faith life invested in the perfection of the Bible. There is little chance that you could ever concede imperfection of “the idol”. The Jehovah's Witness sect would not be happy with you either.I find that people don't believe some of the bigger whoppers in the bible because they sound true, they believe them because they are in the current collection of books that comprise the Bible.
For instance, if the flood story was not in the Bible and someone recently dug up a story like that with the Dead Sea scrolls, then thinking men would discount such a ridiculous story out of hand. But, because the Hebrews wrote that in to connect dead end blood lines with Adam, people actually teach that nonsense. And not only do innocent children trust it because the adults teach it, but adults actually still believe the flood story.
Anyhow, you can and will ignore the analysis used to show the evidence of multiple authors in the OT books, carry on.
Colter
Hi Colter, (Link to evidence)Rudimentary logic proves nothing either.
I have documented the authenticity of the “The Bible's” divine Authorship.
The only thing the book of Urania has is its self proclamations. (kinda like the quran)God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
The Urantia book revealed unknown scientific facts in it's day, science is now catching up with those bold statements.To the contrary, science has continually shown that the historic facts of the Bible are inaccurate, but bible worshippers tend to be intellectually dishonest people because they have put their faith in the book instead of the God whose actions inspired some events that the human authors wrote about in the books of the various cannon's.
Colter
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 01 2012,20:31) Hi Jammin,
Are you just interested in knowledge and not salvation?
read your imagination nick,i believe what the bible says that the word is the son of GOD.
Quote (kerwin @ May 01 2012,11:58) Colter, Why do you believe the suppositions of so-called experts who do not know God are of any great importance?
The goal of the message is to be righteous as God is righteous. The hypothesis of these ignorant and corrupt men are of no aid in obtaining that purpose.
Quote Why do you believe the suppositions of so-called experts who do not know God are of any great importance? The men who converted ordinary secular history into miraculous history did not necessarily “know God”. These elite priest classes were the same gang of temple thugs that the prophets railed against.
Just because someone has faith does not mean that all that they write is “inspired”.
Quote The goal of the message is to be righteous as God is righteous. The hypothesis of these ignorant and corrupt men are of no aid in obtaining that purpose. Science only destroys the superficial, superstitious components of imperfect religion, the spiritual truths stay in tact, they are eternal. But thankfully, these unquestionable Godly men that you speak of in the institutional church, can no longer murder legitimate bible scholars.
BTW, the older secular histories mentioned by the OT authors strangely were not preserved; Such books as “The Doings of the Kings of Israel” and “The Doings of the Kings of Judah.”
Colter
Quote (Colter @ May 01 2012,21:20) Quote (Ed J @ May 01 2012,11:52) Quote (Colter @ May 01 2012,11:36) Quote (Ed J @ May 01 2012,09:20) HI Colter, Hearsay and popular opinion,
nothing that could be considered as evidence?Pointing to (Chronicles and Kings) the books of the scribes of the king,
to classify these as less than canon, would the book of Urantia not fall into this same classification?God bless
Ed J
Pride blinds Ed j, you have your entire faith life invested in the perfection of the Bible. There is little chance that you could ever concede imperfection of “the idol”. The Jehovah's Witness sect would not be happy with you either.I find that people don't believe some of the bigger whoppers in the bible because they sound true, they believe them because they are in the current collection of books that comprise the Bible.
For instance, if the flood story was not in the Bible and someone recently dug up a story like that with the Dead Sea scrolls, then thinking men would discount such a ridiculous story out of hand. But, because the Hebrews wrote that in to connect dead end blood lines with Adam, people actually teach that nonsense. And not only do innocent children trust it because the adults teach it, but adults actually still believe the flood story.
Anyhow, you can and will ignore the analysis used to show the evidence of multiple authors in the OT books, carry on.
Colter
Hi Colter, (Link to evidence)Rudimentary logic proves nothing either.
I have documented the authenticity of the “The Bible's” divine Authorship.
The only thing the book of Urania has is its self proclamations. (kinda like the quran)God bless
Ed J
(1)The Urantia book revealed unknown scientific facts in it's day, science is now catching up with those bold statements.To the contrary, (2)science has continually shown that the historic facts of the Bible are inaccurate, but (3)bible worshippers tend to be intellectually dishonest people (4)because they have put their faith in the book instead of the God whose actions inspired some events that the human authors wrote about in the books of the various cannon's.
Colter
Hi Colter,Where is the evidence of these “three” assertions that YOU make?
4) spin
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Colter @ May 01 2012,22:52)
Just because someone has faith does not mean that all that they write is “inspired”.Colter
Hi Colter,That's a good description
of the book of Urania's authors!
Faith based yes but inspired of God?God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgColter,
Quote Science only destroys the superficial, superstitious components of imperfect religion, the spiritual truths stay in tact, they are eternal. I do not worship the god you call science as his glory falls short of God’s and his paragons are known to shift like the waves of the sea.
Quote But thankfully, these unquestionable Godly men that you speak of in the institutional church, can no longer murder legitimate bible scholars. The ramblings of those that you call legitimate bible scholars give evidence that they are anything but. There words lack sound and valid logic as well as the Spirit of God.
It is written:
2 Timothy 3:16
New International Version (NIV)16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
Your bible scholars have strayed as their teachings do not do these things.
Scripture does mention books that we seem not to have today. 1st and 2nd Kings seem to be summaries. The Law and the Prophets bear more weight than the Histories; but all is the Word of God.
Quote (Ed J @ May 02 2012,05:11) Quote (Colter @ May 01 2012,21:20) Quote (Ed J @ May 01 2012,11:52) Quote (Colter @ May 01 2012,11:36) Quote (Ed J @ May 01 2012,09:20) HI Colter, Hearsay and popular opinion,
nothing that could be considered as evidence?Pointing to (Chronicles and Kings) the books of the scribes of the king,
to classify these as less than canon, would the book of Urantia not fall into this same classification?God bless
Ed J
Pride blinds Ed j, you have your entire faith life invested in the perfection of the Bible. There is little chance that you could ever concede imperfection of “the idol”. The Jehovah's Witness sect would not be happy with you either.I find that people don't believe some of the bigger whoppers in the bible because they sound true, they believe them because they are in the current collection of books that comprise the Bible.
For instance, if the flood story was not in the Bible and someone recently dug up a story like that with the Dead Sea scrolls, then thinking men would discount such a ridiculous story out of hand. But, because the Hebrews wrote that in to connect dead end blood lines with Adam, people actually teach that nonsense. And not only do innocent children trust it because the adults teach it, but adults actually still believe the flood story.
Anyhow, you can and will ignore the analysis used to show the evidence of multiple authors in the OT books, carry on.
Colter
Hi Colter, (Link to evidence)Rudimentary logic proves nothing either.
I have documented the authenticity of the “The Bible's” divine Authorship.
The only thing the book of Urania has is its self proclamations. (kinda like the quran)God bless
Ed J
(1)The Urantia book revealed unknown scientific facts in it's day, science is now catching up with those bold statements.To the contrary, (2)science has continually shown that the historic facts of the Bible are inaccurate, but (3)bible worshippers tend to be intellectually dishonest people (4)because they have put their faith in the book instead of the God whose actions inspired some events that the human authors wrote about in the books of the various cannon's.
Colter
Hi Colter,Where is the evidence of these “three” assertions that YOU make?
4) spin
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
1) UB The News3) My experience
Colter
Kerwin<
2 Timothy 3:16 (“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” ) was not yet “scripture” when it was written.
The Bible does not say that it is “the word of God”, church authorty created that to control.
But even Pauls so called letters have problems:
Composition
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia affirms Paul's authorship and documents the fact that a vast majority of the early church fathers attest to Paul's authorship of all the pastoral epistles. Most conservative biblical scholars agree.
However, many liberal biblical scholars argue that 2 Timothy was not written by Paul but by an anonymous follower, after Paul's death in the First Century.[1]
The language and ideas of this epistle are notably different from the other two Pastoral letters yet similar to the later Pauline letters, especially the ones he wrote in captivity. This has led some scholars to conclude that the author of 2 Timothy is a different person from 1 Timothy and Titus. Raymond E. Brown proposed that this letter was written by a follower of Paul who had knowledge of Paul's last days.[2]
Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, however, would go further than Brown. He noted that a number of pseudepigraphic letters attributed to the Apostle were rejected in antiquity, indicating that there was not “a climate of acceptance, which would make it easy for the forged Pastorals to enter the mainstream of church life.” Murphy-O'Connor continues,
Realistically, the only scenario capable of explaining the acceptance of the Pastorals is the authenticity of one of the three letters. Were one to have been long known and recognized, then the delayed “discovery” of two others with the same general pattern could be explained in a variety of convincing ways.[3]
Murphy-O'Connor then argues, based in part on recent research on the style of this work, that 2 Timothy was the authentic one of the trio. It was not widely known due to its private nature, but eventually published for the benefit of the church. Using it as a model, O`Connor suggests one of Paul's followers then wrote the other two Pastorals and was able to persuade his fellows that they were also previously unknown letters of Paul.[4]
Colter
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 02 2012,06:07) Hi Colter,
So the measurements of foolish men have found a lack in God?
No, the shamans have always used various techniques of fear and manipulation to control the masses and enrich themselves.Now that the church isn't murdering people we can shine the light on what was hidden.
But some things like Noah's flood story don't even pass the laugh test, that’s your own fault for being so gullible.
Colter
Hi Colter,
So you now cling to those who have no faith and find human conspiracies instead of truth?Hi Colter,
Why do you offer the whore as the church?
The apostasy occurred very soon after the Master died.Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 02 2012,06:57) Hi Colter,
Why do you offer the whore as the church?
The apostasy occurred very soon after the Master died.
The “whore” as you call it requested the writing of the books, took control of all the material and created the cannon, so, you need to have a little think about what you're saying.“When modern man wonders at the presentation of so much in the scriptures of different religions that may be regarded as obscene, he should pause to consider that passing generations have feared to eliminate what their ancestors deemed to be holy and sacred. A great deal that one generation might look upon as obscene, preceding generations have considered a part of their accepted mores, even as approved religious rituals. A considerable amount of religious controversy has been occasioned by the never-ending attempts to reconcile olden but reprehensible practices with newly advanced reason, to find plausible theories in justification of creedal perpetuation of ancient and outworn customs.” UB
Colter
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
