View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Discussions Religion and Theology, Scriptures, Bible Debate, etc.

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby Arouet » 20 Jan 2011, 18:53

fazisha wrote:What kind of Bible should I purchase? I want to give my teacher a Bible. She collects Bibles and I want to get her a Bible to add to her collection. Could you give me suggestions.. I would prefer if its unique or different from the usual Bibles. Could you put the picture and where I can buy it?


Another new poster coming in and asking this same question? Is this a weird new kind of trolling? Why the heck would one person join just to come and ask that here, let alone two?

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1603
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07






Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby NinjaPuppy » 20 Jan 2011, 19:41

Arouet wrote: Another new poster coming in and asking this same question? Is this a weird new kind of trolling? Why the heck would one person join just to come and ask that here, let alone two?

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1603

I'm two steps ahead of ya. 8-)
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby enriquemellado » 17 Mar 2011, 04:11

just a thought but you should read more carefuly.. i was surpirised to see how deep you went on some verses. and how shallow on others.
2timothy 3.. says.. inspired by God...... you can't separate 'inspired' from 'God'... it's one word..... exhaled by God is what it says......
this compliments with 2 Peter 1.. where it says men of God were 'inspired'..... to write the scriptures.. this is not inspired like timothy's verse.... it means moved... driven... used to carry along....
God spoke the Bible... and men just carried it ... when they wrote it and when they carried it from generation to generatrion until today..

but i believe the bigges mistake is to question authorship... that's like trying to read a book "written" by 'someone', and while reading it, question where in the book it says, and more over proves, that this 'someone' in fact wrote it.
you just can't start even reading genesis 1:1 without believing God wrote it.... it's His book.... you either believe it or not... there is nothing to prove.. ..
you want to read a book God didn't write.... that men calim He wrote, there are plenty.. the Bible just isn't one of them...
the purpuse is to know Him not to prove to me or anyone else for that matter that He wrote it...
the Bible is there to show you the God that wrote it and how to get to Him, not to prove His existance...
in the end i guess, it's just a question of faith... that's is what is required to touch the invisible...
i do agree people can't expalin that and that is no excuse, as Christians we don't have an excuse, and a "it just says so" isn't enough, but the real center question is... Why would you want to read the Bible???? and after you read it, as Pontious Pilate said... "What should I do with this Jesus?"......
God Bless...
enriquemellado
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 17 Mar 2011, 03:54

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby ProfWag » 17 Mar 2011, 18:31

enriquemellado wrote:you just can't start even reading genesis 1:1 without believing God wrote it.... it's His book.... you either believe it or not... there is nothing to prove.. ...

I'm not sure I can agree with this comment. Not at all. if you are going to read the Bible already believing God wrote it, then you will believe everything you read, and that's dangerous. If you begin reading the bible with a preconceived notion that God wrote it, then you are believing what someone else told you and regardless of the trustfullness that you put into that person who instilled that belief, it is still the belief of someone else and it could be suggested that you should form your own belief. I'm all for people believing in God, if that's your belief, but to not question that personal belief makes one naive. If the Bible is written by the hand of God, why are there 3 different versions of the 10 Commandments? Why do the 4 Gospels not all list the same disciples. And I could go on. Couldn't those make one question the reliability that it was written by the same person (i.e. God.)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible ISN’T God’s word!

Postby Craig Browning » 18 Mar 2011, 05:05

Franc28 wrote:"What is odd is that while the Evangelists and Apologists emphasize this doctrine of Biblical infallibility so strongly and obsessively as if it were the central issue, the Bible itself doesn’t even do that."

Well, that's not very odd actually. All mass movements, all collectivist belief systems need an infallible doctrine (so that it's always your fault if anything goes wrong, not the fault of the doctrine). Therefore, if the doctrine doesn't proclaim itself infallible, the believers just have to believe it's infallible anyway.


:lol: :lol: :lol:
My, my, my... this just made me crack-up as I suddenly flashed on the cult of Science & Skepticism -- the "New" Gospel and sacred writ of humankind. :lol: :lol: :lol:


The fact that there are more than 100 versions/variations & translations of the Bible (along with the two new releases on Fat Tuesday of this year) reveals just how imperfect the book actually is; especially given the deliberate changes done to how scriptures were presented physically on paper in certain instances (the physical script would sometime be sat in geometric patterns which were part of a known "code" -- a means by which to understand the passage that would be exclusive to certain initiates but not all that embraced the doctrine). Too, certain symbols and metaphors were deliberately changed starting as early as the time of Paul, who had to modify some of the "prophecy" he spoke of -- early in his ministry Christ was to return within his life-time (also mentioned in the other gospels) but late in his ministry changes were made to the idea, postponing the return to some future, unknown date. Constantine, memory serving me right, insisted that the famed number of the Beast shared in John's Revelation be changed so that the true number of power would not be accessible to those outside the priesthood. . . several other changes of this sort were done along with superimposing the many "miracles" attributed to older deities, sages & heroes on key biblical characters, especially Jesus; the whole feeding of the multitudes for an example, can be traced to Pythagoras and a mathematic intrigue, while the whole raising Lazarus from the dead can be linked to far older tales of Miracle Workers as well as known "Mystery Rites" attributed to Dionysus and as far back as Osiris in Egypt.

Very, very little (if any) of the Bible is "original" by any standards; the bulk of it can be found to be plagiarism in one form or another. The problem is a simple and probably "innocent" matter however; traditionally orators and scribes would adopt hero tales from other regions and "personalize" them to the people they spoke to. This not only explains why so much of the bible hosts direct parallel to other, older, religious sects and heroic entities, but likewise why there were so many "Gospels" found in the years following the crucifixion. While there were "canons" that pre-date his time, it was the tenets laid out by Justin Martyr in the 2nd century that more or gave us what is now viewed as "The Bible", the irony is however, the Bible has never been fully ratified though it is assumed to be such. There exist many extreme debates about the book, the authenticity of key passages and the need to censor out sections that a known forgeries let alone the questions that have prevented full "official" canonization of the completed library, the list of reasons being rather extensive.

My favorite look at the bible however -- an assumptive view you could say -- centers on John's vision in Revelation during which the angel hands him a book that he is to consume, which is sweet to the taste but makes his belly bitter. . . this has reminded me of the the Good Book far too often; something you may wish to digest for yourself and mull over. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby ProfWag » 18 Mar 2011, 21:04

In a recent article on yahoo, I quote the following: " In the old translation of the world's most popular Bible, John the Evangelist declares: "If anyone says, 'I love God,' yet hates his brother, he is a liar." Make that "brother or sister" in a new translation that includes more gender-neutral language and is drawing criticism from some conservatives who argue the changes can alter the theological message."
So, if it is the word of God, how can the Bible be changed? Was it divine intervention that told them it should be changed from "brother" to "brother and sister?" If so, why wasn't it so stated when it was originally written? If not divine intervention, then why was the original writer right and the current translator wrong? If there is an answer, then who are we to say what should be in the Bible and what should not? You see, I just have way, way too many issues with that book to believe it was the word of God.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby Craig Browning » 19 Mar 2011, 23:55

One important point when it comes to biblical infallibility, at least to my mind, centers on the casting out of demons and how so many of the demonic concepts spoken of in the book are proven illnesses and have been accepted as such for most of the past century or two. There are other such demonstrations, including scientific explanation that is now being used to "prove" certain biblical tales (such as the Exodus of Moses) that for eons, were viewed as sacrilege (it has been known since the time it all happened, that Volcano of immense size had triggered the entire series of events and that certain areas in which "the sea" stood, did at times reveal sand-bars that could be walked across -- the recent revelations of these things is more of a confirmation of long known facts). Then again, the whole Moses story can be connected to a far older Babylonian tale in which the main character's name was Mesus. . . coincidence?

Here's a similar issue that theologians are aware of but priests & preachers deliberately ignore; "The World" is a term used in both Testaments but not in context of the day, an era in which the "known world" was quite limited and nothing close to what we know today as "the world" -- an entire planet. As a result, the great flood of Noah's fame probably didn't entail a global inundation but simply a regional disaster such a Gilgamesh's tale would imply (along with the scores of flood tales that date to about the same period of time and ONLY within the geographic area that would have been viewed as the "Known World" in a pre-bronze-age perspective. Who's to say, given this reality, that the destruction of the known world by fire and a great war wasn't the formal destruction of Rome?

Jesus offers a couple of important points on this issue as well, the first was uttered when he was roughly 12 years old and asked by the rabbi what the whole of the law was, his reply was "To love the Lord thy God with all thy soul and might; to love thy neighbor as they self. . . the rest is but commentary"

In other words, everything outside this most basic tenet, is man putting words into god's mouth -- nothing else actually matters.

The irony is that this "Golden Rule" can be found in EVERY major religious tradition the world over in some form, complete with the suffix factor "Do unto others as you would have done unto you".

Wouldn't the world be a wonderful place to live if man would simply pull his head out of his ass and LISTEN -- to realize none of the other stuff matters; it separates and creates dissension rather than uniting and allowing room for peace to prevail? :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby victorious » 07 Jun 2012, 22:12

"“Bible is the word of God” implies that the text in the Bible books are God’s words verbatim."
>>man, you're simply implying. what's your basis? where do you relate the word verbatim?

"And as we know, words are just that - words"
>>that's your reality, such a limited 'reality'. real Christians do not live by 'words' in your own reality. we all agree that we live by our faith - faith in our own reality - faith which your reality will always hide from you, unless you step out of that dark limitation. Things, people, Satan is holding you back. Break free! (you might know soon that it's been a long time you've been free, you're just proud you might get the chains broken by yourself. don't try hard dear, move, and God will bless you even more - that which is eternal.)
User avatar
victorious
 
Posts: 2
Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 21:58

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby victorious » 07 Jun 2012, 22:37

this also reminds me of Jesus speaking to the Pharisees in figures of speech. to THEM, parables were like "what is He saying??"; to the UNBELIEVERS of this time, the Holy Bible is already a complete set of figures of speech where word per word is a mystery. guys, you're studying the Bible, right? looking for inconsistencies because you hate it? if so, may i rhetorically ask: Why would a man raise a child only because he does not want a child? (does it make any sense?hmmm...)
User avatar
victorious
 
Posts: 2
Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 21:58

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby Craig Browning » 08 Jun 2012, 01:29

victorious wrote:this also reminds me of Jesus speaking to the Pharisees in figures of speech. to THEM, parables were like "what is He saying??"; to the UNBELIEVERS of this time, the Holy Bible is already a complete set of figures of speech where word per word is a mystery. guys, you're studying the Bible, right? looking for inconsistencies because you hate it? if so, may i rhetorically ask: Why would a man raise a child only because he does not want a child? (does it make any sense?hmmm...)


Exsqueeze me?

I don't hate the bible I do detest the zealots that believe it their right to use it as a suppository on the rest of the world however.

As to your note about raising a child someone doesn't want. . . you have me rather confused. Isn't it the christian "moralists" that insist on people raising unwanted children? The pro-lifer types that want everyone to respect the embryo and yet, they don't have a solution when it comes to taking care of this "life" that's not wanted by the mother or related family. Where's the "Christian" responsibility here? The church don't want to raise such children on their own budgets in a manner that is healthy and FREE. . . that is to say, with no strings attached. The church does NOTHING without demanding a person's soul. . . I always found that peculiar in that I've never seen a Pagan, Satanist or even Atheist require such a thing when it comes to people that are in need or being treated in inhumane ways . . . something I should point out (at least for those in denial) that the church (religious zealots, most oozing from the Abrahamic line) being one of the leading sources for; absurd cruelty and inhumanity for most of the past 1,700 or so years it has officially existed.

Yes, the bible is rife with inaccuracies, especially when it comes to actual history and historic time lines vs. the mythical time lines it insists on -- the facts don't match the claims -- the cities that Joshua supposed destroyed in Canaan did in deed collapse but not even remotely close to the time of the Exodus as the bible suggests and nowhere close to the same dates. . . there's nearly a 200 year span in time between the first collapse (Jericho) and the last of the famed cities falling. . . a 200+ year old warrior just don't fit in with the biblical tale nor history.

Stop reading the book and buying into what it says as absolute truth and start using the grey stuff god put between your ears. "Bible Study", at least for the honest soul, doesn't mean you are constantly reading and re-reading the scriptures but rather, you are learning about the text, where it came from, what the parallels are in the world and the fact that many such tales pre-date the actual inclusion of them into the canonized texts. It means you will look at the Editing and additions made by scribes and how deliberate license was taken when it comes to changing the name of the main characters (especially "Jesus") so that the tales would incorporate chief esoteric elements including Numerology, the multiple meaning of symbols and images such as Angels or "Beasts". Churchianity prohibits its patrons from asking about such things let alone studying and learning about the OCCULT side of their faith -- that hidden and quite dark aspect of the priesthood and the very carnal agenda it has.

When a magician makes a coin vanish he does so by way of misdirection; getting you to look where he wants you to look vs. where the truth exists. It is an act of deception and as such, the domain of the Devil. . . IF we are to consider what the scriptures imply, right?

Why then is this ultimate truth and infallible collection of lore, so well guarded and praised? Why is it promoted as the thing to see and watch and anything outside of it viewed as wrong and even "evil"?

The Devil/Satan is the master of deception and the best, most direct way to "win" his battle with God and Good would be to convince the world that his way is the ultimate good and truth -- the divine and most sacred while damning that which is the actual truth. . . the hand in which the vanished coin really rests or, as it were, the occult solution . . . the hidden reality we are all being told to deny and ignore.

The devil's greatest trick played on man wasn't proving he didn't exist but proving that he is the Father Creator All. . . and in so doing, lead us to believe that the true all loving parent of man is the lowly demon and fallen angel -- Lucifer.

Funny, how many wars and betrayals throughout history are NEVER blamed on said entity when it comes to the facts and yet, time and time again such acts of terrestrial hell are perpetuated by the very people who can't live within the tenets of the very gospels the espouse.

Peace on Earth could, in theory at least, be obtained if we but destroyed three texts and ways of thinking -- the Talmud, the complete Bible and the Koran. Obliterate all traces of the Abrahamic lie and promote a more Zen-based culture and within three generations at the most, we would know a far more balanced and benevolent world. Not so much a place of total peace in that man will always allow its ego to get the better of him and worldly lusts & conquests will forever be a temptation. However, without the auspices of religion, and specifically these three primary forms of cult-mindedness, a much wider and secure sense of peace would be known and true progress seen within the auspices of society.

Here's the Twist. . . I think it would be a crime to loose such texts because they are filled with wisdom and true greatness. It is man's abuse of "the words" and how he uses them as a means by which to justify carnal gain, domination, oppression of our fellows and so much more -- this is where the sin lays and the lie that envelopes the institutions built up and around their teachings; the sin of men trying to put their will into the expression of the divine.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Three Bible verses that say the Bible is NOT God’s word!

Postby TheLordIsMySheppard » 28 Nov 2012, 03:01

The Bible clearly states that In the beginning was the Word and the Word became flesh. Christ IS the Word of God. Why Christians generally state that the Bible is the word of God I do not know but it is written in there for us to chose to believe or not.

Also, it does my head in when people say 'the world could not have been created in seven days....WHY do we think that we have the monopoly on days???!!!!! typical earthlings!! in Genesis it first defines what a day is, darkness and light evening and morning was the first day (neither should we think that we have the monopoly on evening and morning). Then on the fourth day two lights to govern earth day and earth night (sun and moon)....question, by what measure were the previous days? .... a question I ask myself.
User avatar
TheLordIsMySheppard
 
Posts: 1
Joined: 28 Nov 2012, 02:46

Previous

Return to Religion / Theology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest