Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 272

Thread: How true is the Bible?

  1. #201
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Old chap I can't have that. The British Empire in its several phases was a pretty normal brutal cynical affair.

    It began in Ireland where rowdy locals couldn't rule themselves and raided Britain. That's was not a benign matter and the ethnic violence still rankles to this day. Britain expanded into the Americas using piracy and privately run colonies where natives were massacred (often by men trained up in the Irish colonies) and slaves worked the land: the British colonies developed a pernicious doctrine of racist slavery that casts a pall over the US to this day. In India John Company cynically acquired a huge territory where locals were starved (at best through negligence and quite possibly as a punitive measure). In Australia the tradition of massacring locals was quietly allowed while publicly decried. In Africa things were a bit grim, the theft of Boer territories was utterly dishonourable and exploitation of locals pretty evil (made to look less disgusting by the Belgians and Germans).

    The British Empire was not the worst in history (goooooo AZTECS!), it did some good and some evil, but calling it benign is not plausible. Ripping cash out of Hindus and engaging in hateful religious strife with angry Irish was not God's work.
    Cyclops,

    And yet there are 53 countries that adhere to the Commonwealth and not all of them were under British rule. Of course that organisation is no longer ruled by us yet it has a great affinity for us and the Queen. And yes there were downsides in the empire and one accepts that as part of having an empire but the upside surely shows when these nations and others want that association with us. Was God involved? Of course He was and still is.

  2. #202

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    XX century was historically speaking compared to previous centuries, among the most atheist centuries, and it had Boer War, WWI and WWII, which had the Atomic Bomb introduced.

    Characters like Caesar or Napoleon didn't seem to do their thing out of "religion" either.
    It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.

    -George Orwell

  3. #203
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    fkizz,

    It certainly has proved to be one turbulent century in which anti religion played the biggest part and still is as we can see today. The struggle for power goes on as does the ambition to kill off Christianity wherever it dwells. The new religion of globalism is on a roll meaning that the one world system won't be long away to bring Jesus back to sort all things out.

  4. #204
    Commissar Caligula_'s Avatar The Ecstasy of Potatoes
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,658

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    I recently watched the comedy Talladega Nights.



    Although the film was a bit crass, in its rumination upon Jesus in a tuxedo T-shirt, do you have a particular version of Jesus that you like best? For example Jesus feeding the poor, healing the lepers, ect?




  5. #205
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Commissar Caligula_,

    It may seem strange to you but I don't try to imagine Jesus in an artistic way and try to avoid anything that depicts Him that way, why? Because the second commandment tells me not to. So for me, it is the voice, the words, the power in them that is of most importance not His looks. Indeed Scripture tells us that He was of no physical significance lest any desire Him and yet any depiction we seem to get in films about Him is of a big strong handsome guy which to me is the exact opposite. These I avoid. As to the things He said and did it would be His strength to not back down when confronted by anything, physical or unnatural that stood in His way. His greatest miracle was going on that cross to pay for my sin as well as others and then after three days appearing to over four/five hundred people that He had indeed risen from the grave showing to us that we who believe on Him will one day do the same some to glory and others to shame. That's my Lord Jesus Christ.

  6. #206
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Thinking on about what happens when Jesus does come back to judge all as well as put this creation into non-existence what sprung to mind was that as God cannot live with darkness and there won't be any in the new heaven and earth all those going into eternal torment will nor can ever find rest again. God lives in light because He is Light and so all them condemned to this fate in the heavens will never know peace never mind rest for their souls. As their sin will ever be before them all the attributes of that sin will be all that they know for all eternity. Jesus gave us a picture of that with the parable of the poor guy in the arms of Abraham and the rich guy across the chasm in hell. So what happens does so because God is just and has to be making the Bible more relevent than ever. Who in their right mind wants a future like that especially when there is an alternative in Jesus Christ?

  7. #207
    Praefectus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    6,206

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Cyclops,

    And yet there are 53 countries that adhere to the Commonwealth and not all of them were under British rule. Of course that organisation is no longer ruled by us yet it has a great affinity for us and the Queen. And yes there were downsides in the empire and one accepts that as part of having an empire but the upside surely shows when these nations and others want that association with us. Was God involved? Of course He was and still is.
    Basics you have not contradicted my statement that the British Empire was not a benevolent institution. Simply stating God is involved seems like you are trying to cloak some of the Empires sins behind God's skirts.

    Did God annihilate the Tasmanian aborigines? Did God starve a million people in Ireland? If you make the Empire God's work you make God an Imperialist and a failed biased one at that. It seems very petty to imagine your deity as being the personal property of Parliament or supporting one segment of humanity to the detriment of the rest.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  8. #208
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Basics you have not contradicted my statement that the British Empire was not a benevolent institution. Simply stating God is involved seems like you are trying to cloak some of the Empires sins behind God's skirts.

    Did God annihilate the Tasmanian aborigines? Did God starve a million people in Ireland? If you make the Empire God's work you make God an Imperialist and a failed biased one at that. It seems very petty to imagine your deity as being the personal property of Parliament or supporting one segment of humanity to the detriment of the rest.
    Cyclops,

    Did you not know that God knew the very words in your posting before you put them down. That's how powerful God is my friend and so He allows many things to happen in His great scheme of things. As it is written, He raises up nations and destroys others and if one looks at these, it is because they have worshipped other gods taking away His glory from Him. All creation is His Personal property and if it wasn't He ccouldn't be God the Creator, the Saviour and the Comforter. How can He be a failure for when Jesus Christ returns to finalise all things, " Every knee shall bow, every tongue confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord." Yes, all the dead and all the living will do that as this creation becomes no more and a new creation takes place. Many will be for that place yet many more will not having to spend eternity with no peace. For me that means all my pains will be gone forever but not so those that have denied Him because their pains will continue forever. Part of that pain will be that they are aware of what they have done in rejecting Him as Jesus pictured with the rich guy and his brothers and the poor man in the arms of Abraham.

  9. #209
    Praefectus
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    6,206

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Cyclops,

    Did you not know that God knew the very words in your posting before you put them down.
    Right, God knows all things but he didn't know where Adam was in Eden? (Genesis 3:8) And he didn't know that Adam had eaten the fruit? (Genesis 3:11).

    I'm sorry Basics but you keep making claims about God that the Bible does not support. Have you allowed religion to obscure God from your heart?

    The word Britain never appears in the Bible, please don't tell me God ever talked about Fat Harry and his syphilis, or had a plan for Camilla Parker-Bowles and Prince Charles' tampon fantasies. We have both read the Bible and we both know the name Charles never appears.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  10. #210

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Right, God knows all things but he didn't know where Adam was in Eden? (Genesis 3:8) And he didn't know that Adam had eaten the fruit? (Genesis 3:11).
    The words do not necessarily show that God didn't know where Adam and Eve were. It would be like a mother asking out loud where her child wa when she can see the door of the pantry is slightly ajar and knows darn well where her child is, she just wants her child to come up and say it, not that she really didn't known. When God ask Adam ate the fruit from the tree of knowledge, he knew Adam had, just as a mother when she ask her child if he ate the cookies she told him not to eat knows her child are the cookies, she can see the chocolate smeared around his lips and hands and knows he did. She asks the question because she wants her child to own up to the fact he had done what he had been told not to do, not because she didn't know the answer.

  11. #211
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Cyclops,

    The simple answer to the power of God is that for forty years I kidded myself on that my desiny was in my own hands when clearly it wasn't. Secularly I must be the luckiest guy alive yet now that I am saved I'm convinced that was never the case. He was always in control even when I was out of control as it appeared many times. When I read my Bible I can see many similarities in its stories and its explanations so I don't see where I can possibly add anything to what God has put down on behalf of others concerning Him. I can only give my message from what I see in Scripture and make a point of not trying to add to what is there. What we have to remember is that the Bible narrative is about God first and foremost. All creation was for His good pleasure, us being bit part players, supporting the central Character Who is Jesus Christ so what we think or what we do is to elevate that truth and never distort it. Paul goes to great lengths to proclaim this as do others and this I am very well aware of in what I write.

    Now concerning the scene in the garden Who was it that talked and walked with Adam? Were it the Father Adam and Eve would have been fried so it must have been Jesus and if so then He knowing what would transpire worded the scene as He worded many other scenes as if He didn't know but yet He did as can be found in other texts in Scripture. The number of times where Jesus knew or saw people before they actually met is well recorded in Scripture so Common Soldier hit the nail on the head in his explanation. I believe we are told these things to enhance the power that was given to Christ by the Father showing that He indeed came from God and is God. Regarding Britain and its rise to power I'll have to come back on that one as there is a Husky howling to get his walk done and if I don't do it he'll wreck this computer.

  12. #212

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    Cyclops,

    The simple answer to the power of God is that for forty years I kidded myself on that my desiny was in my own hands when clearly it wasn't. Secularly I must be the luckiest guy alive yet now that I am saved I'm convinced that was never the case. He was always in control even when I was out of control as it appeared many times. When I read my Bible I can see many similarities in its stories and its explanations so I don't see where I can possibly add anything to what God has put down on behalf of others concerning Him. I can only give my message from what I see in Scripture and make a point of not trying to add to what is there. What we have to remember is that the Bible narrative is about God first and foremost. All creation was for His good pleasure, us being bit part players, supporting the central Character Who is Jesus Christ so what we think or what we do is to elevate that truth and never distort it. Paul goes to great lengths to proclaim this as do others and this I am very well aware of in what I write.

    Now concerning the scene in the garden Who was it that talked and walked with Adam? Were it the Father Adam and Eve would have been fried so it must have been Jesus and if so then He knowing what would transpire worded the scene as He worded many other scenes as if He didn't know but yet He did as can be found in other texts in Scripture. The number of times where Jesus knew or saw people before they actually met is well recorded in Scripture so Common Soldier hit the nail on the head in his explanation. I believe we are told these things to enhance the power that was given to Christ by the Father showing that He indeed came from God and is God. Regarding Britain and its rise to power I'll have to come back on that one as there is a Husky howling to get his walk done and if I don't do it he'll wreck this computer.
    Was it God's doing when you added to the Gospel?
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  13. #213

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    Was it God's doing when you added to the Gospel?
    Can you explain what you mean? Exactly how was Basic adding to the Gospel?

  14. #214

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Basics you have not contradicted my statement that the British Empire was not a benevolent institution. Simply stating God is involved seems like you are trying to cloak some of the Empires sins behind God's skirts.

    Did God annihilate the Tasmanian aborigines? Did God starve a million people in Ireland? If you make the Empire God's work you make God an Imperialist and a failed biased one at that. It seems very petty to imagine your deity as being the personal property of Parliament or supporting one segment of humanity to the detriment of the rest.
    The British created the modern university system in India, and made India one unite country with s democracy. India was neither united nor a democracy before the British came, nor is there the slightest indication thst India would have united or turned to a democracy if the British hadn't come. And India suffered lots of famines and wars long before the British arrived.

    Without the British enpire, there would have been no US, no moon landing, no microchip, transistor, no laser, no industrial revolution, no steam engines, no trains. The lives saved by the by products ofnrhe British Empire far exceeds the lives lost. Today's poplutaion size and living standards could not be maintained without the industrial revolution created by the British.

    Other empires existed, but the Mongols did not build any universities or railroads where they went for example. Sure attrocities were committed during the British Empire, and this is not to justify thembut that can be said for every major power. The Chinese virtually exterminated thd Dzungar, and have largely replaced the native Mongols in inner Mongolia and native Manchu in Manchuria, the Ainu are all but extinct in Japan.

    If you are to judge the British Empire, you need to take into account both the good and evil it did. Most historians judge thr Roman Empire a good thing, but rhe Jews shonsaw their Temple destroyed and them eventually banished from their homelands might disagree, as would Bodicda. Yet the world we live in would not exist without it, and neither would not without the British Empire. Would it be better off? I doubt it. The fate of the Tasmanians likely would have been similar if it had been the Japanese had settled the land, given how they treated the Ainu and the Chinese in WW2. I know it doesn't make it right, but other empires have done as bad, and did less for their conquered people.

    Did God ordain rhe British Empire, I don't know. God uses the tools he has available when it comes human affairs. The Bible said God used the Assyrians as a tool to accomplish his will, but that does not mean the Assyrians were regarded as good, or nicex or godly. God used the Babylonians also as an tool, and some scholars think the Old Testament as we have it was written during the Babylonian captivity. The Babylonian capture of Jerusalem helpednl spread Jews to as far as Egypt and Babylon, where many remained for thousands of years. For all the flaws of the British Empire, the fact there is a Commonwealth says a lotx since there is nothing similar for the Ottoman empire, or even the Spanish or Portuguese as far as I know.
    Last edited by Common Soldier; September 20, 2019 at 09:27 AM.

  15. #215

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Can you explain what you mean? Exactly how was Basic adding to the Gospel?
    He claimed before that Adam and Eve's biology changed because of their departure from Eden. He claimed that if they didn't leave heaven they'd produce an offspring every single time they had sex when in fact only 5% of intercourse result in pregnancy. He claimed this to be part of the Gospel.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  16. #216

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    He claimed before that Adam and Eve's biology changed because of their departure from Eden. He claimed that if they didn't leave heaven they'd produce an offspring every single time they had sex when in fact only 5% of intercourse result in pregnancy. He claimed this to be part of the Gospel.
    Yes, I can see that is the case. Unfortunately, it is all too often the case people confuse their interpretation of the Bible with what the Bible actually says. Tale Genesis, for example. The writer of Genesis might not have meant 7 twenty four hours days when he talked about "Day" and "Night", especially since the sun wasn't created until the 4th day, as I recall. We know that elsewhere in the Bible, it talks about "weeks" symbolically standing in for years, and the Bible is often metaphorical.

    You can see this in the Gospels - when Jesus said beware the yeast of the Pharisees, he had to explain to his disciples that he did not literally bread made Pharisees, but that he was talking metaphorically. But at other times Jesus was being literal, as when he said he would arise in 3 days, he literally meant it*. We are often like that, mixing the literal with the metaphorical in our speech - I could say "three days ago it rained cats and dogs", and while the 3 days was literal, the "cats and dogs" was merely metaphorical. Since the Bible was written a long time ago, it may be difficult at times for us today to distinguish when the Bible intended to be literal and when it was being literal. I could see some historian from the far future thinking when I said "cats and dogs", misunderstand and really thought it was raining mammals from the sky. There have been documented cases of rains of fish and frogs from the sky (but no mammals, as far as I know). It is speculated that perhaps a waterspout sucked them out of some pond, but no one really knows the cause.

    *Whether Jesus did or not arise from the dead, or whether he even existed is a matter of faith. The writers of the Gospels clearly thought Jesus was being literal when he said it, and that Jesus was a real person, regardless of what the actual truth of the matter is. The NT writers thought Jesus as a person and his resurrection were real events, not merely some metaphor the annual renewal of the seasons. Whether they were right in their belief is an entirely different matter.

  17. #217

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    sub'd to this thread

  18. #218

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Yes, I can see that is the case. Unfortunately, it is all too often the case people confuse their interpretation of the Bible with what the Bible actually says. Tale Genesis, for example. The writer of Genesis might not have meant 7 twenty four hours days when he talked about "Day" and "Night", especially since the sun wasn't created until the 4th day, as I recall. We know that elsewhere in the Bible, it talks about "weeks" symbolically standing in for years, and the Bible is often metaphorical.

    You can see this in the Gospels - when Jesus said beware the yeast of the Pharisees, he had to explain to his disciples that he did not literally bread made Pharisees, but that he was talking metaphorically. But at other times Jesus was being literal, as when he said he would arise in 3 days, he literally meant it*. We are often like that, mixing the literal with the metaphorical in our speech - I could say "three days ago it rained cats and dogs", and while the 3 days was literal, the "cats and dogs" was merely metaphorical. Since the Bible was written a long time ago, it may be difficult at times for us today to distinguish when the Bible intended to be literal and when it was being literal. I could see some historian from the far future thinking when I said "cats and dogs", misunderstand and really thought it was raining mammals from the sky. There have been documented cases of rains of fish and frogs from the sky (but no mammals, as far as I know). It is speculated that perhaps a waterspout sucked them out of some pond, but no one really knows the cause.

    *Whether Jesus did or not arise from the dead, or whether he even existed is a matter of faith. The writers of the Gospels clearly thought Jesus was being literal when he said it, and that Jesus was a real person, regardless of what the actual truth of the matter is. The NT writers thought Jesus as a person and his resurrection were real events, not merely some metaphor the annual renewal of the seasons. Whether they were right in their belief is an entirely different matter.
    I think there are cases of having different interpretations and then there is adding stupid stuff like that that no logical interpretation could substantiate. basics did the latter.
    The Armenian Issue
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=1930

    Cities: Skylines
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...ities-Skylines

    "We're nice mainly because we're rich and comfortable."

  19. #219
    basics's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Scotland, UK.
    Posts
    9,073

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    Quote Originally Posted by PointOfViewGun View Post
    He claimed before that Adam and Eve's biology changed because of their departure from Eden. He claimed that if they didn't leave heaven they'd produce an offspring every single time they had sex when in fact only 5% of intercourse result in pregnancy. He claimed this to be part of the Gospel.
    PointOfViewGun,

    Dear friend, you're a little confused here on a few counts. One, I always maintained that the garden was a figure for heaven and that two, being the case had, Adam and Eve not sinned and were allowed to reproduce, their offspring would have been perfect as Adam and Eve were up to that point. That they did sin, their nature was changed meaning that now having the curse upon them, they couldn't stay in the garden any more and so they were evicted. That argument was in the debate about abortion if memory serves me correct. I never added nor did I take anything away from Scripture.

    Common Soldier,

    " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." The place where God lives knows no darkness and so in creation He created darkness as well as a planet called Earth which was at that point a ball of water over which the Holy Spirit hovered. Next He called for light and since the sun, moon and stars had not yet come into existence it was His own light that lit the scene. This is bourne out in the Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ where John tells us that the Light of Jesus will light up the new heaven and earth meaning that darkness will be no more. When that first day was complete God called it evening and morning. Scripture does not separate that first day's creation from the rest of time as we know it and is mentioned many times as being twentyfour hour days. We then read that He brought up the land as well as put a firmament of water above it on the second day and by the third day He had established all the herb bearing seed on the planet. On the fourth day He created the sun, moon and stars for the benefit of all life on the planet which would come on the fifth day apart from man and beasts of the earth. On the final day of creation came the beasts of the earth leaving one special piece left to create, man, why? Because man was made in His image. Whose image? The image of Jesus Christ our Creator, the One Who would walk and talk with man in the garden, the One Who would eat with Abraham and the One Who would wrestle with Jacob. This same Jesus Whom God prophesied about at the fall of Adam and Eve, the One Who would pay for their sin as well as the sin they endowed to all mankind. The whole point is that we were created for God and done so superbly and yet man still doesn't get it.

  20. #220

    Default Re: How true is the Bible?

    This was the original quote from basics:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Quote Originally Posted by basics View Post
    PointOfViewGun,

    Yes, the implantation is important as is the rest of the sequence but fertilisation is the most important thing to begin the sequence. If we look into the garden of Eden we are told that everything was just perfect meaning that if Adam and Eve had sexual relations each one would probably have brought about offspring that were their equal. The fall of Adam and Eve changed all that. The nature of all things changed meaning that in an imperfect world pregnancy was not as clear cut as it might have been if they had been kept in the garden which of course they couldn't have. So, with each passing generation men and women had to contend with a downward spiral both physically and environmentally bringing us where we are today. God however, did not leave it at that for He provided the answer for most if not all diseases for man to find never mind the answer to getting the curse from off men's backs.


    As we can see, basics speculated that in an untarnished environment (such that Eden is) all biological functions would operate without inefficiency or imperfection. This lead him to arguing that had Adam and Eve known one another carnally prior to the fall, each union would have resulted in the successful creation of offspring. Setekh angrily responded to this by accusing basics of "blasphemy", of "putting words into god's metaphorical mouth" and of having "absolutely no idea what god intended its perfection to be".



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •