The Bible shifted some Gears in my mind.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sat May 10, 2014 10:36 am

Again in 1 John 3:5 "And you know that he was manifested to take our sins away, and in him is no sin." We know this is talking about Jesus; Jesus was " Manifested" to remove sin. What does that mean? It means Jesus " Made it obvious" that he is the sineater. He " Made it CLEAR" that no sins would be able to condemn anyone. This means no matter how hard the Christians try to set up and establish a place for sinners who do not repent, they cannot condemn them into their hell.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun May 11, 2014 10:35 am

Again in Psalms 32:1-2, " Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven whose sins are " Covered." Blessed are those whom the Lord does not impute iniquity and in whose spirit there is no deceit." Again and again we see scripture that supports God forgiving everyone and " Covering their sins."

Sin is not even being " Imputed", ( or charged), to humanity. Only religious people are trying to impute sin to people.

Not God.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Mon May 12, 2014 7:40 am

If sin cannot stop all of our salvation, then what else could?

Nothing!!

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Mon May 12, 2014 3:06 pm

Mickiel;1453905 wrote: If sin cannot stop all of our salvation, then what else could?

Nothing!!

This is the gospel that one day will be preached in all the world.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Tue May 13, 2014 12:02 pm

Luke 3:6, " And ALL FLESH, ( meaning every single human who has ever lived), shall SEE the Salvation of God!" This is our destiny, to actually see the plan of God come into being. We will see it and experience it, and no religious deception can alter this predestination.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Wed May 14, 2014 7:01 am

In John 4:42, Jesus is described as " The Savior of the World", meaning everyone, religion seeks to limit that to only certain believers, because their belief is infected by their imaginary hell fire.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Thu May 15, 2014 1:48 pm

In 1 Corinth. 3:15, a man can be judged and his works burnt up, and he can actually suffer loss, but yet still be SAVED BY FIRE! Not doomed and tortured with fire, saved with it!

So fire is a salvation in Heaven.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Fri May 16, 2014 8:30 am

In John 4:42, Jesus is called " The Savior of the World", In 1 Tim. 2:3-6, Jesus is called " The Ransom for ALL", In 1 John 4:14 Jesus is again called " The Savior of the World", how can Jesus be called the Savior of a world, if he does not save that whole world? And this is where religion has confused things; religion does not believe Jesus has saved the world, only small parts of the world, or the people.

An ugly error in understanding.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sat May 17, 2014 11:46 am

Again in Col. 2:13, " And you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, has he quickened together with him, having " Forgiven you all your sins." Again and again we see total forgiveness for us in the bible; no sin can stop us from being with God.

Its academic! Its unbelievable!

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:46 pm

I am so glad to see the religion section here thriving again; its too important to let it die and wither away; the bible is far MORE than we know.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Tue Jun 30, 2015 9:32 am

Mickiel;1481653 wrote: I am so glad to see the religion section here thriving again; its too important to let it die and wither away; the bible is far MORE than we know.
The Bible is a single book. If it weren't so ambiguous that would be an end to it. As it is there are countless interpretation of what it means. There are even multiple versions of the Bible, each purporting to be the 'true' meaning. The Bible is not more than we know. On the contrary, it's far less. The information within it, whether you believe it to be true or not is further limited by repetition & contradiction, making it even less. Everything else referred to as being "Of The Bible" is made up by those who would wish to usurp it in order to control the gullible masses (no pun intended).

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:50 am

FourPart;1481677 wrote: The Bible is a single book. If it weren't so ambiguous that would be an end to it. As it is there are countless interpretation of what it means. There are even multiple versions of the Bible, each purporting to be the 'true' meaning. The Bible is not more than we know. On the contrary, it's far less. The information within it, whether you believe it to be true or not is further limited by repetition & contradiction, making it even less. Everything else referred to as being "Of The Bible" is made up by those who would wish to usurp it in order to control the gullible masses (no pun intended).

Unavoidable Four part, true but it could not be helped; in fact, its how things were intended. You give a child something written, or tell it a story, what do you expect;

Humanity were children when all this information began. All created individually original and different in how they processed the information.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:36 pm

According to Jewish scholars there is no one right interpretation of anything in the Bible. All interpretation have validity. It must be read through Jewish eyes. They wrote the book in the first place. Will be back for more comments.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:53 pm

Ted;1481766 wrote: According to Jewish scholars there is no one right interpretation of anything in the Bible. All interpretation have validity. It must be read through Jewish eyes. They wrote the book in the first place. Will be back for more comments.

The book is for human eyes, and I would like to see any evidence that disproves that.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:08 pm

Seems to me that most if not all books are for human eyes. What was your point? Humans wrote it and humans read it. Unless of course we have some highly intelligent monkeys around.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 5:34 am

Ted;1482962 wrote: Seems to me that most if not all books are for human eyes. What was your point? Humans wrote it and humans read it. Unless of course we have some highly intelligent monkeys around.

All books are for human eyes specially the bible.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Jul 25, 2015 12:29 pm

And dozens if not hundreds and thousands are right up there as well. The Bible is not alone.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:36 am

Ted;1483221 wrote: And dozens if not hundreds and thousands are right up there as well. The Bible is not alone.

That's certainly true.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:19 pm

The Bible has to be read with the writing style in mind. Most of it is "midrash" . Midrash was an ancient hebrew way of writing making a great deal of use of metaphor and analogy. There is much truth in the bible but if read literally it leads to all kinds of absurdities. Think about Numbers 31 where God not only condones war crimes but encourages them. Think about the God who said we must not kill and at the same time uses a multitude of plagues to distress or murder people. "Though shall not kill," That is a problem in my mind. How did Judas die? He can't have died both ways. That is a bit like over kill. LOL

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:36 pm

When the councils began to collect the scriptures together there were. lets say multiple copies of Mark each different. In the Greek language of the day there was no punctuation marks so translation beccame a bit of a academic and guessing game. Was Athanasius correct or was Aryus correct. There were many disagreements at the time but under threat of the sword they had to make some choices. This holds true for all the Nt as well as the OT. There are still words in both Hebrew and Greek that we are still not sure of in terms of meaning. It would appear that Paul in Romans is anti-gay as we know it today. Not so say the scholars Paul was not talking about homosexuality as such but pederasty. So much for a literal reading. There is a lot of creative dancing going on to make the Bible say what people want it to say.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Aug 01, 2015 7:44 pm

Some of the great theologians of the day have written much that could and should be included in the sacred texts: W. Bruggaman, Dom Crossan, Marcus Borg, Hans Kuhn, the Dali Lama and a host of others.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:36 am

The whole thing is a case of Chinese Whispers. Even in the space of a single generation there have been multiple Versions published, each of them with certain nuances of their own, where they differ from the original. Then there are newer versions again, based on the previous 'New' version, with further nuances of its own - and these are variations taken from the same language.

For a bit of fun, try taking a phrase from the Bible & paste it into one of the online translators & put it into another language. Then, using another translator, translate that again into a different language, and so on for a few times, until you eventually come to translate it back into English. I think I can pretty much guarantee that it won't bear much similarity to the original.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 4:57 am

I believe the bible is a work of God, but I can't explain just how God works; because its just beyond me. I mean, I have tried to explain; for years, but I only discover that I really don't know? Because I don't know God. Its not easy, in my view. In Eccle. 7:13, " Consider the work of God: for who can make straight , that which he has made crooked?" There are cracks in the bible, because they were meant to be there. Why, I just don't know.

I can guess; but that would be all its worth.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 6:53 am

How can it be a work of God if he didn't write it, or even sit down & discuss it with those that did?

Was it Ronald Reagan who said of his autobiography, "I look forward to reading it".

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:03 am

FourPart;1483703 wrote: How can it be a work of God if he didn't write it, or even sit down & discuss it with those that did?

Was it Ronald Reagan who said of his autobiography, "I look forward to reading it".

The principle , in belief, is 2 Pet. 1:21, men were " Moved by the Spirit OF God - to write the books." Or inspiried to write by God's influence on them. He wanted men to write it, and I believe in his influence; just as a human can be inspired to write things by " Whatever influenced them"; God is believed to be the influence behind the bible being written.

And I believe God holds the power to influence humans, who can be individually aware of him doing it, or not.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:43 am

In other words, "I think that mouse wants me to write his life's story. Therefore I shall write what I think his life story might have been & then tell everyone that the mouse wrote it".

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 9:46 am

FourPart;1483718 wrote: In other words, "I think that mouse wants me to write his life's story. Therefore I shall write what I think his life story might have been & then tell everyone that the mouse wrote it".

Yes, something like that; except human history has real events that back this story up. REAL PEOPLE, PLACES AND THINGS. Which you cannot change or erase.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:25 am

The mouse is real. It can be seen. It can be recorded as existing. An imaginary God cannot.

There is evidence that mice exist. There is none that any God does.

The fact that locations & other points of history are used in someone's imaginary biography is no proof that the story itself is true.

Christopher Robin exists. He is the son of A.A.Milne. He also wrote a book called "The Enchanted Places" (I have a copy). He had a Teddy called Winnie the Pooh. The Hundred Acre Wood exists. The bridge that they used to play Pooh Sticks on exists - I've been there. According to your logic, this is all evidence to the fact that there are also talking rabbits, piglets, kangaroos & joeys & teddy bears that eat hunny.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:44 am

FourPart;1483731 wrote: The mouse is real. It can be seen. It can be recorded as existing. An imaginary God cannot.

There is evidence that mice exist. There is none that any God does.

The fact that locations & other points of history are used in someone's imaginary biography is no proof that the story itself is true.

Christopher Robin exists. He is the son of A.A.Milne. He also wrote a book called "The Enchanted Places" (I have a copy). He had a Teddy called Winnie the Pooh. The Hundred Acre Wood exists. The bridge that they used to play Pooh Sticks on exists - I've been there. According to your logic, this is all evidence to the fact that there are also talking rabbits, piglets, kangaroos & joeys & teddy bears that eat hunny.

On page 113 of his thread I listed the evidence, an on most pages; disprove each one; one by one, or why should I listen to your claims?

Lets have it!

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:34 pm

Mickiel;1483734 wrote: On page 113 of his thread I listed the evidence, an on most pages; disprove each one; one by one, or why should I listen to your claims?

Lets have it!
Would that happen to be the one where you pasted a load of rubbish from the Bible claiming that to be proof? Sounds like Pahu's tactics to me. Taking the approach that the more you paste something the less bollox it is. Basically, when the veracity of a publication is in question, unsubstantiated quotes from it are not evidence of anything. They weren't the first time you pasted it, and it doesn't change matters by simply referring to it again.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:23 pm

FourPart;1483744 wrote: Would that happen to be the one where you pasted a load of rubbish from the Bible claiming that to be proof? Sounds like Pahu's tactics to me. Taking the approach that the more you paste something the less bollox it is. Basically, when the veracity of a publication is in question, unsubstantiated quotes from it are not evidence of anything. They weren't the first time you pasted it, and it doesn't change matters by simply referring to it again.

Most of the poofs I posted were unbilical, they were not from the bible. Read it before you comment on them.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Fri Aug 07, 2015 12:37 pm

Mickiel;1483862 wrote: Most of the poofs I posted were unbilical, they were not from the bible. Read it before you comment on them.

As soon as anyone floods a forum with pasting, especially of a Biblical nature, I just lose interest & switch off.

(and I can't help but wonder if that was a Freudian Slip you made about the "poofs" you posted)

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:06 am

FourPart;1483916 wrote: As soon as anyone floods a forum with pasting, especially of a Biblical nature, I just lose interest & switch off.

(and I can't help but wonder if that was a Freudian Slip you made about the "poofs" you posted)

It was a slip, and a funny one that I missed. And I try not to " Flood forums with pasting" now, but back then I was of a different mindset; some liked it.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Mon Aug 10, 2015 8:11 pm

I take the Bible very seriously but not as a history book which it is not. I made a lengthy comment on the Bible in the thread about getting to heaven. You might want to read it.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 2:19 pm

Ted;1484021 wrote: I take the Bible very seriously but not as a history book which it is not. I made a lengthy comment on the Bible in the thread about getting to heaven. You might want to read it.

The book is full of history, explain to me why its not a history book?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:31 pm

It is not a history book. It is primarily a religious documeny. To read it as a history book leads one into all kinds of absurdities: Talking snakes, suns that stand still, the graves of the saints opening upp at the crucifixion, the contrary genealogies. The question of How Judas died if he was indeed an historical person, the God who supposedly knows everything needed to ask where Adam and Eve were in thegarden,, the creation myth itself, , the story of the exodus for which there is not one shred of physical evidence, The God who clearly says we are not to commit murder who then visits all kinds of plagues on the Egyptians the same god then tells the Hebrews to kill every man woman and child in Canaan but tels the soldiers they can keep the virgins for themselves. I could go on but that should suffice. It is not a history book it is midrash.,

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:45 pm

I should add that Moses was dead long before the first five books were written. The God who told us not to murder drowns the Egyptian the christmas story and the crucifixion story. Yes Jesus was born but often referred to as a mamzer in the ancient days (a person of questionable parentage, army during the exodus. A psalm that says we should dash the childrens brains out on a rock. I find it hard to believe that any one could possibly think this was a history book. Yes there are some historical characters but the majority is midrash and that includes the Crucifixion story. (Yes Jesus was crucified). The rest of those stories are are ludicrous as history. Jesus on the cross decides to quot the OT "My God my God why have you forsaken me. The story of Jesus fulfilling prophesy is purely hindsight. They tried to make him fit the ancient prophesies.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:47 pm

Another thought. It is not that the bible shifted gears but those who took it literally who did. Hohum

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:01 pm

Consider this;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_the_Bible

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:41 pm

Sorry but I don't use Wikipedia since it is an encyclopaedia that any one can add to no matter how far out it is. I rely on valid research in all the fields. Go to the scholars nd don't take their words out of context like Pahu does.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 10:33 am

Donald Trump likes the bible; interesting how it strikes many people of different back rounds.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:13 am

Interesting that over 6 billion bibles have been printed. And the bible has 66 books within it.

Man, that's a lot of books!

http://www.statisticbrain.com/bibles-printed/

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:21 pm

Trump may like the Bible but watching his behaviour I suspect he is literalistic.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Fri Aug 28, 2015 6:18 pm

Ted;1485043 wrote: Trump may like the Bible but watching his behaviour I suspect he is literalistic.

Whatever he is, he likes what he likes!

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Aug 28, 2015 7:58 pm

So did Hitler during the first part of the war.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sat Aug 29, 2015 7:18 am

Mickiel;1484955 wrote: Donald Trump likes the bible; interesting how it strikes many people of different back rounds.

I wouldn't necessarily believe what Donald Trump has to say; he's whimsical.

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sat Aug 29, 2015 9:20 am

AnneBoleyn;1485100 wrote: I wouldn't necessarily believe what Donald Trump has to say; he's whimsical.

I don't believe everything Donald Trump has to say, I just think it interesting that a man like him, in his political position, has a fancy to say the things about the bible, that he does. As if its to his advantage. Or perhaps he is being for real? He has no real political agenda, and perhaps no real spiritual one either.

But he thinks we need " More Spirit!" That's just of interest to me.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Aug 29, 2015 11:55 am

More spirit if it suits him and not necessary to suit God or any other human. In my view he is self-centred and egotistical. He is full of himself.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Aug 30, 2015 7:14 am

Mickiel;1485111 wrote: I don't believe everything Donald Trump has to say, I just think it interesting that a man like him, in his political position, has a fancy to say the things about the bible, that he does. As if its to his advantage. Or perhaps he is being for real? He has no real political agenda, and perhaps no real spiritual one either.

But he thinks we need " More Spirit!" That's just of interest to me.

He's pandering. Like most politicians; perhaps I should extend that to "most everyone."

Mickiel · Post by **Mickiel** » Sun Aug 30, 2015 9:37 am

AnneBoleyn;1485196 wrote: He's pandering. Like most politicians; perhaps I should extend that to "most everyone."

Well I agree he is pandering, I do not agree with his politics, what little he speaks on. But I like that he spoke on the bible, he still sees that value of a politician doing that.

Because the bible has a lot of weight on it. Its a serious relevant reference to refer to. That's why he did it, and keeps doing it.