1
   

Genesis Redux

 
 
Questioner
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 07:34 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
Questioner,

I believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. He was perfect. He had no sin. He was in a human body yes, but He did not have worldly desires.

Let me ask a question here. If, as some believe, this is all made up, why in the world didn't they write it so there wouldn't be all these questions?


I think I attempted to answer this awhile back, if not I'll give it a go here.

The greatest falsehood is the one that has enough of a ring of truth to it to be believable, but not enough truth to be shown as a falsehood.

There's not enough evidence anywhere to prove that everything written in the bible is true. BUT, there are plenty of instances where there is an unquantifiable unknown (read: god) that is the generic answer for all questions regarding the lack of evidence or proof.

Example #1 "Why, if God loves the world enough to send Jesus, his son, to die painfully . . . why then does he not love the world enough to remove disease? or stop wars? or (fill in the blank)?"

Answer #1 "It's God's will, and who are we to question god's will?"

Example #2 "How could the world have possibly been created in 7 days?"

Answer #2 "God is all powerful, he can do anything and make it look just as he intended it, fossil records and all."

The more people ask these questions, the more they are affirmed that God is all powerful, because WE obviously don't understand the reasoning. It has all the appareances of a cleverly-built con, yet it keeps so many people in power (Rome, megachurch officials, many small countries) that it will continue to be perpetuated.

This isn't all to say that this is the way it truly is, nor is a suggestion that you should drop your beliefs at once and move on to something else. It's merely an unbeliever's answer to your question.

BTW: I'm still awaiting your email. Smile
0 Replies
 
Questioner
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 07:36 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
jstark,
It's not the Bible itself that I am always speaking of. I am speaking of the Word of God, the message of God, etc. I read other books about God.


How does that jive with this:

Momma Angel wrote:

Oh, I read it. The wisdom I seek is the wisdom of God, not man. I do not seek worldly things. I seek the spiritual.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 07:46 pm
You didn't get my email? I got your long one and then I responded. I will check my sent folder.

I don't understand what you mean by how does that jive with this? I had misread something in that post. I thought I corrected that.
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:10 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
jstark,

It's not the Bible itself that I am always speaking of. I am speaking of the Word of God, the message of God, etc. I read other books about God.

[snip]


I'm not questioning other books, I'm questioning the KJV. If you can except the historical reality that the KJV is not in it's original form, then can you accept that it is but one book among many that can help us to understand God?

Kind Regards
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:22 pm
jstark,

Of course there are other books that can help us learn about God. I'm just having trouble with the thing you said about books being left out of the Bible. That bothers me.
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:30 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
jstark,

Of course there are other books that can help us learn about God. I'm just having trouble with the thing you said about books being left out of the Bible. That bothers me.


My question is why would it bother you? What do you think is going to happen with a bunch of manuscripts in different languages that are hundreds and thousands of years old being handled by an imperfect care taker such as man?

-J

note: I'm dropping the kind regards as a convenience, I think you get the point already Smile I put it at the end of my posts to remind me to be civil, but it can get repetitive.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:32 pm
What bothers me is the fact that I believe the Bible to be divinely protected by God. I don't believe books were left out.
0 Replies
 
Questioner
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:34 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
You didn't get my email? I got your long one and then I responded. I will check my sent folder.


Nope, never did. Was anxious to read it too.

Quote:
I don't understand what you mean by how does that jive with this? I had misread something in that post. I thought I corrected that.


Well, on one hand, you claim to seek the wisdom of God, not the wisdom of man. Yet on the other hand you read what man has to say about God and claim that as a partial source for what you consider your knowledge of God. It seems that somewhere there's some irony just waiting to explode.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:42 pm
LOL. Ok, I understand. There are certain authors that I really respect concerning Christian study. I mainly stick with those. But, anytime I do read other than from the Bible I always ask God to give me the understanding I am supposed to have.
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:51 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
What bothers me is the fact that I believe the Bible to be divinely protected by God. I don't believe books were left out.


As Questioner is pointing out, there is a difference between the word of God and the books of man. If God is divinely protecting the Bible, He has changed his mind several times and appears to be holding several different opinions on the matter simultaneously.

If the book, the KJV, can be shown to be shown to have changed, e.g. sections removed, could you find solace in the consistency of God Himself?

Or does your faith require that the KJV be immutable?

-J
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 08:56 pm
Well, let's take this one part at a time. Can you point out to me where he has changed him mind several times and appears to be holding several different opinions?
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 09:08 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
Well, let's take this one part at a time. Can you point out to me where he has changed him mind several times and appears to be holding several different opinions?


He has changed his mind by altering what is Biblical canon. I and J_B have pointed out several books that were part of the original KJV but were removed a few hundred years later and have alternately been included and removed ever since. The Wisdom of Solomon is one such book. I am focusing on the KJV because it is fairly recent and it is the one that matters to you. But there has been controversy over what is and is not canon ever since, well, Christ died. Such is the lot of man.

There are several versions of the Bible available today, KJV is only one. each has it's differences. Some differences are small, such as translation, some are large, such as including entirely new material, or reordering existing material. So if God is divinely protecting these Bibles, it seems that several opinions are being held at once.

I'm going to watch the Rameses movienow , I'll check back in later though.

-J
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 09:31 pm
jstark,

He (God) hasn't changed a thing. First of all, what proof do you have that there were books that were originally part of the KJV and then removed? How is this proven?

But like I said, the basic message has not changed one iota. I believe God divinely protects the message. Perhaps I should have stated it that way in the beginning.
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:06 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
jstark,

He (God) hasn't changed a thing. First of all, what proof do you have that there were books that were originally part of the KJV and then removed? How is this proven?

But like I said, the basic message has not changed one iota. I believe God divinely protects the message. Perhaps I should have stated it that way in the beginning.


The KJV of 1611 included the following books:

The First Book of Esdras
The Second Book of esdras
The Book of Tobit
The Book of Judith
The Wisdom of Solomon
The Book of Baruch
The Story of Susanna
The Song of the Three Children
The Sotry of Bel and the Dragon
The Prayer of Manasseh
The First Book of Maccabees
The Second Book of Maccabees
It also contained some additions to the Book of Esther.

As the KJV you have most likely does not include these books, I can only conclude that they were removed at some point. That point is actually the 17th century for the most part.

Catholics claimed these books to be authoritative in 1546 at the Council of Trent and included them in their Bible. As I said, the KJV included them as well. If you were a Christian back in 1400, you would be reading them as part of the Bible, God's divinely protected word. Now, as it happens, you are arguing that they are not God's divinely protected word.

-J
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:08 pm
jstark,

Those sound like some of the names from the Book of Mormon?
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:25 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
jstark,

Those sound like some of the names from the Book of Mormon?


They are not and could not be as they were written from between 300 BC to 100 AD. I don't know much about the Mormon Bible, but I have a copy and here are the books it lists:

First Book of Nephi
Second Book of Nephi
Book of Jacob
Book of Enos
Book of Jarom
Book of Omni
The Words of Mormon
Book of Mosiah
Book of Alma
Book of Helaman
Third Nephi
Fourth Nephi
Book of Mormon
Book of Ether
Book of Moroni

-J
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:29 pm
I looked them up myself after I posted that. I am reading right now about those other books. I haven't found where it says these books were found, discovered, etc.?
0 Replies
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:33 pm
Joseph Smith supposedly discovered them written on golden tablets in upstate New York in the 1820s or 30s, in an unknown language, and translated them thru divine inspiration.
0 Replies
 
jstark
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:34 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
I looked them up myself after I posted that. I am reading right now about those other books. I haven't found where it says these books were found, discovered, etc.?


These books have always been around in the same way that the books of the old and new testament have been around. These were not discovered like the Nag Hammadi library or the Dead Sea Scrolls.

-J
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 11:35 pm
jstark,

That's not telling me much. How do you know they are books left out of the Bible? Who said so? Where can I find proof?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Genesis Redux
  3. » Page 5
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/24/2024 at 07:11:35